People v. Barajas

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the issue was adequately preserved where defendant objected to testimony while the court was considering witness’s qualification to testify as a gang expert and also filed a posttrial motion stating that the court erred in allowing the witness to testify as an expert
• holding that the issue was adequately preserved where defendant objected to testimony while the court was considering witness’s qualification to testify as a gang expert and also filed a posttrial motion stating that the court erred in allowing the witness to testify as an expert
• reversing mandatory consecutive sentences under Whitney where defendant’s “two counts of aggravated discharge did not result in severe bodily harm to the victims of those [non-triggering] felonies”
• testimony that witnesses had been threatened or feared for their safety as a result of testifying is admissible to explain why the witnesses had given inconsistent statements
• testimony that witnesses had been threatened or feared for their safety as a result of testifying is admissible to explain why the witnesses had given inconsistent statements

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).