People v. Elder
227 Cal. App. 4th 411
| Cal. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Defendant Jeffrey Elder was convicted of kidnapping for robbery (two counts), robbery (two counts), and assault with a deadly weapon with great bodily injury (GBI) (Count Seven), with GBI found true on Counts Three, Four, and Seven.
- The Jan. 14, 2010 incident in a Money Mart van involved Elder brandishing a BB gun, forcing the victims to drive, and injuring Kaleikini's finger during the struggle while attempting to escape.
- Kaleikini’s finger injury occurred as he resisted the crimes and attempted to restrain Elder, who was trying to flee the van.
- The defense argued Elder did not personally inflict the GBI and that the BB gun was not a deadly weapon and/or the injury was not caused by Elder’s conduct.
- The trial court denied a motion for acquittal under 1118.1 and sentenced Elder to 18 years to life, with several enhancements and stays under section 654 for some counts.
- The judgment was later amended to address one improper 1202.5 fine, the stay of another, and to reflect a consecutive one-year sentence on Count Seven, with the GBI enhancement stayed as to that count.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Elder personally inflicted GBI | Elder did not directly cause the injury; Kaleikini’s finger injury was caused by resistance and by Kaleikini’s own actions. | GBI requires either direct application of force by Elder or participation that directly caused the injury. | GBI properly attached; Elder was the direct cause during the struggle while escaping. |
| Whether the GBI on Count Seven occurred during the commission of the assault | GBI occurred in the course of the offenses during the defendant’s conduct and resistance, not after completion. | GBI must be tied to the time of the assault itself, not post-assault events. | GBI was inflicted during the commission of the assault; the enhancement was properly applied. |
| Whether two section 1202.5 crime prevention fines were proper given section 654 stays | Two fines were imposed per case/count and should not be stayed when some sentences are stayed. | Under section 654, fines should be stayed where sentences are stayed, and only one fine per case is authorized. | One 1202.5 fine must be stayed and the other stricken; the stay applies to the fines as to the stayed counts. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Cross, 45 Cal.4th 58 (2008) (GBI scope broad; ‘personally inflicts’ not limited to direct force)
- People v. Warwick, 182 Cal.App.4th 788 (2010) (direct or indirect causation standards for GBI enhancements)
- People v. Guzman, 77 Cal.App.4th 761 (2000) (multiple participants may directly participate in inflicting the injury)
- People v. Rodriguez, 69 Cal.App.4th 341 (1999) (instruction error on ‘personally inflicts’ proximate cause distinction)
- People v. Walls, 85 Cal.App.3d 447 (1978) (post-entry acts can be within the scope of the commission of burglary for enhancements)
- People v. Johnson, 104 Cal.App.3d 598 (1980) (escape during or after crime can still be within the commission for purposes of enhancements)