People v. Calderon CA2/6, B333591

Richard Calderon, a confirmed member of the Westside Locos gang and under the Sureño gang umbrella, was convicted of two counts of assault with force likely to produce great bodily injury and two counts of conspiracy to commit battery.
Calderon and his cellmate, Ruiz, attacked two inmates: Alvaro H. (a former gang member/gang dropout) and Steven S. (a protective custody inmate, former domestic violence convict), in Ventura County jail settings.
The trial court allowed evidence of Calderon's gang affiliation and a prior gang-related incident, which helped explain gang-related rules and motives for jail violence.
The prosecution used gang evidence to establish motive and intent, as Sureño rules require members to attack perceived dropouts and those in protective custody.
The jury convicted Calderon on all counts; he was sentenced to four years in prison. Calderon appealed, arguing evidentiary, sufficiency, and instructional errors related to the conspiracy convictions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Admission of gang evidence	Gang evidence was necessary to explain motive, context, and intent for conspiracy.	Evidence was more prejudicial than probative and should have been excluded.	Evidence was properly admitted; it was probative and not unduly prejudicial.
Sufficiency of the evidence for conspiracy counts	Circumstantial evidence (shared actions, gang obligations, coordinated attacks) shows agreement to commit batteries.	No independent evidence of agreement; alleged attackers could have been acting independently due to Sureño training.	Substantial evidence supports finding of conspiratorial agreement; convictions affirmed.
CALCRIM No. 415 jury instruction on inferring agreement	Instruction accurately defined law and contextualized how agreement can be inferred from conduct.	Instruction misled jury; "common purpose" does not imply mutual agreement required for conspiracy conviction.	Instruction correct; no reasonable likelihood of jury misapplication.

People v. Daveggio and Michaud, 4 Cal.5th 790 (Cal. 2018) (Evidence Code section 1101 restricts propensity/disposition evidence but allows it for other purposes)
People v. McKinnon, 52 Cal.4th 610 (Cal. 2011) (Motive evidence typically more probative than prejudicial; wide latitude for admission)
People v. Cravens, 53 Cal.4th 500 (Cal. 2012) (Standard of review for sufficiency of evidence on appeal)
People v. Ware, 14 Cal.5th 151 (Cal. 2022) (Elements and proof of criminal conspiracy)
People v. Johnson, 57 Cal.4th 250 (Cal. 2013) (Criminal conspiracy may be shown by circumstantial evidence of mutual understanding)
People v. Thompson, 1 Cal.5th 1043 (Cal. 2016) (Existence of conspiracy inferable from conduct and relationship of alleged conspirators)
People v. Lewis, 14 Cal.5th 876 (Cal. 2023) (De novo review of jury instruction wording and accuracy)
People v. Solomon, 49 Cal.4th 792 (Cal. 2010) (Burden on defendant to show reasonable likelihood instruction was misapplied)