Skip to content
Name: People v. Broderick Boys
Case #: C051707
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/23/2007

An injunction could not stand where there was inadequate service. The Yolo County District Attorney obtained a permanent injunction by default against The Broderick Boys, a street gang, that prohibited members from associating with one another within the specified locale and imposing a curfew on them. Appellants had standing to contest the injunction because they would be sufficiently aggrieved by its terms and were not required to admit membership in the gang. The injunction could not stand as there was inadequate service. Only one gang member was served and he was of unknown standing in the gang so…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Ortega
Case #: C047487
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 12/20/2006

In a prosecution for Penal Code sections 190.2, subd. (a)(22) and 186.22, subdivisions (a) and (b)(1), an element of all three allegations being the existence of a criminal street gang, the prosecution is not required to prove precisely to which subset of the criminal street gang appellant belonged. Further, a unanimity instruction is not required as to which gang was involved in the offence as the name of a gang is not a criminal act, such that a unanimity instruction applies. Here, evidence was presented that appellant had joined the Nortenos when he was young and in the…

View Full Summary
Name: In re Frank S.
Case #: F049045
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 08/01/2006

A juvenile's criminal history and gang affiliations were not sufficient to support a finding that the crime of carrying a concealed dagger was gang-related. After an officer found the knife in the minor's possession, the minor told the officer that he needed the knife for protection because he had been attacked by "Southerners," who believed that he supported the Norteno street gangs. The minor told the officer that he had friends in the Nortenos. At the contested jurisdictional hearing, a gang expert testified that the minor listed himself as a Norteno during intake at the juvenile detention…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Romero
Case #: B185902
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 06/01/2006

A gang enhancement is justified where the evidence created a reasonable inference that the defendant had a specific intent to further a gang member's criminal conduct. The defendant was convicted of murder and attempted murder as the driver in a drive-by shooting. On appeal, he argued that the evidence was insufficient to support the criminal street gang enhancement imposed under Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (b)(1). The Court of Appeal disagreed, holding that while the enhancement statute required a specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members, it did not require intent to…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Maldonado
Case #: B176739
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 11/30/2005

For purposes of proving a pattern of criminal gang activity, an assault with a firearm is a predicate offense within the meaning of Penal Code section 186.22(e)(1). The defendant argued that because section 186.22 lists only an assault with a deadly weapon or by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury, as defined in section 245, the convictions of two alleged fellow gang members for violations of section 245, subdivision (a)(2), did not qualify as predicate offenses. The Court of Appeal rejected the argument, noting that a violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(2), is merely an aggravated…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. McMahon
Case #: G032347
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 06/30/2005
Subsequent History: Rev. gr. 10/12/05: S136165

A defendant’s statement during a custodial interrogation that he was going to call a lawyer, along with his query as to whether he could call a lawyer if he signed an advisement form, was not an unequivocal invocation of his Miranda rights, and thus the court did not err in admitting the interrogation at trial. Moreover, the evidence was sufficient to sustain six counts of attempted murder where defendant fired a total of five shots into a van at close range, killing one person with one shot and firing an additional four shots at the six remaining passengers. …

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Urbano
Case #: F044381
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/11/2005

The court did not err in admitting at trial evidence of a defendant's gesture and comment to his attorney during his preliminary hearing, because the communications were not protected by the attorney-client privilege. In each challenged instance the defendant's voice had been loud enough for spectators to overhear. Noting the limited scope of review and the fact that the trial court had excluded other communications that it had deemed to have been legitimate attorney-client communications, the appellate court found no error. The court next considered several Blakely issues, after first determining that the issues were reviewable absent…

View Full Summary
Name: Garcia v. Carey
Case #: 02-56895
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 01/20/2005

Evidence that a gang member committed a robbery on gang turf is not sufficient to support a gang enhancement under California law. The defendant was convicted of robbery and a gang enhancement in California, and the California appellate courts upheld his conviction and the enhancement allegation. The federal district court granted habeas relief, noting that the sole evidence to support the gang enhancement was the fact that the robberies occurred on gang turf, and that the evidence was constitutionally insufficient to support a finding that he had acted with the specific intent to advance the interests of the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Briceno
Case #: S117641
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 11/04/2004

Proposition 21's additions to the list of serious felonies includes felonies enhanced by Penal Code section 186.22(b)(1). After he was sentenced under the Three Strikes law, defendant argued on appeal that the court erred in finding that his prior conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon for the benefit of a criminal street gang was a strike. The Court of Appeal agreed, but the Supreme Court reversed, holding that the conviction constituted a prior serious felony due to the gang enhancement. The list of serious felonies in section 1192.7 includes any felony violation of section 186.22, which…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Vy
Case #: H025873
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 6 DCA
Opinion Date: 10/01/2004
Subsequent History: Revw. denied 1/19/05

The court did not err in permitted the jury to consider attempted murder as a predicate crime in determining the "primary activities" prong of a gang enhancement, and sufficient evidence supported the jury’s finding. The Court of Appeal concluded that three violent assaults by the defendant’s gang, including the attack on the victim in the instant case, constituted sufficient evidence that the commission of such predicate crimes was one of the primary activities of the gang within the meaning of Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (f). The court further held that the trial court did not err in…

View Full Summary