Absent fundamental unfairness, a court reviewing errors in admission of evidence must ask whether it is reasonably probable the verdict would have been more favorable to the defendant absent the error. People v. Partida (2005) 37 Cal.4th 428, 439. We do not believe the outcome would have been more favorable to Rodriguez had the gang evidence been omitted. Rodriguez admitted firing the gun in Frye’s direction, creating a strong inference of attempted homicide. Furthermore, though Rodriguez was charged with attempted premeditated murder, the jury awarded a lesser charged offense of manslaughter. Since his intent to fire the gun in the Frye’s direction was clear regardless of any mention of gang affiliation, the lesser offense of manslaughter is a highly favorable outcome for Rodriguez. It is not reasonably probable that the verdict would have been more favorable to Rodriguez had evidence of gang membership not been introduced. Thus, we hold that any improper admission of evidence was harmless error.
3.1 Factual Background to Sentencing Hearing…show more content… ~(RT 351)~ The court issued a three-year sentence for the personal and intentional discharge of a firearm, to be served consecutively with the first. ~(RT 351)~ Finally, the court imposed an eight-month sentence to run consecutive to the other counts for the vandalism charge, remarking “I think that the van sustained the most hits in this particular case of the bullet rounds.” ~(RT 352)~ Neither the People nor Rodriguez raised any Section 654 issues during the hearing nor offered any arguments to either support or contest the imposition of a consecutive sentence. ~(RT 341-349, CT
