This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

People v. Gray

Defendant waives his attorney-client communication privilege regarding documents brought to stand and used to refresh his memory in testifying.





Cite as

2011 DJDAR 7178

Published

May 20, 2011

Filing Date

May 19, 2011


THE PEOPLE,

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

MARK WAYNE GRAY,

Defendant and Appellant.

 

No. C062668

(Super. Ct. No. 08F8637)

California Courts of Appeal

Third Appellate District

(Shasta)

Filed May 19, 2011

 

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION

AND DENYING REHEARING

[NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]

 

CERTIFIED FOR PARTIAL PUBLICATION*

 

 

*  Pursuant to California Rules of Court, rules 8.1110 and 8.1105(b), this opinion is published with the exception of parts I., III., IV. and VI. of the Discussion. 

 

 

 

THE COURT:

 

     It is ordered that the opinion certified for partial publication, filed herein on April 28, 2011, be modified as follows:

 

     1.  On page 37, in the first paragraph of the Disposition, which reads:

 

   The misdemeanor convictions for sexual battery (counts 10 & 24) are stricken.  The sentence is modified by staying the punishment for counts 19 (peeking) and count 22 (violating a restraining order), such stays to become permanent upon completion of the jail terms for counts 15 and 22, respectively. 

 

strike the phrase, ?counts 15 and 22, respectively.? and replace it with, ?counts 15 and 20, respectively.? so that the paragraph now reads:

 

   The misdemeanor convictions for sexual battery (counts 10 & 24) are stricken.  The sentence is modified by staying the punishment for counts 19 (peeking) and count 22 (violating a restraining order), such stays to become permanent upon completion of the jail terms for counts 15 and 20, respectively. 

 

     This modification does not effect a change in the appellate judgment; it only corrects the second count ?22? (which should be ?20?) in the Disposition. 

 

     With the above modification, the petition for rehearing is denied.

 

BY THE COURT:

ROBIE, Acting P. J.

      BUTZ, J.

      MAURO, J.

 

 

#232406

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424