California v. Jordan
Annotate this CaseDefendants Rashon Abernathy, Seandell Jones and Shaquille Jordan were 17 years old at the time of a robbery and killing. The three were convicted of first degree murder, two counts of robbery, shooting at an occupied vehicle and unlawfully taking and driving a vehicle. Jones and Jordan were sentenced to 25 years to life, and because of a separate incident leading to an additional count of robbery, Abernathy was sentenced to 50 years to life. On appeal, all three defendants argued that: (1) the trial court erred in failing to instruct that, for the purposes of the felony-murder rule, the jury must find that the target felony (robbery) ended at the point defendants reached a place of temporary safety ("the escape rule"); (2) the sentences imposed by the trial court were unconstitutional under either the federal or state Constitutions because they constituted cruel and unusual punishment; and (3) at sentencing, the trial court incorrectly calculated the defendants' presentence custody credits. Jones and Abernathy further argued the evidence was insufficient to supports their convictions for unlawfully taking or driving a vehicle, and Jones argued the abstract of judgment did not accurately reflect that his five-year sentence for shooting at an occupied vehicle in count 4 was stayed by the trial court pursuant to section 654. After review, the Court of Appeal concluded: (1) although the trial court erred in failing to instruct with the escape rule for felony murder, the error was not prejudicial; (2) sufficient evidence supported Abernathy's and Jones's conviction for unlawfully taking or driving a vehicle; (3) there is no merit to the defendants' contention that their sentences constitute cruel and unusual punishment; (4) Abernathy's and Jordan's judgment should be modified to award an additional day of presentence custody credit; and (5) a clerical error in Jones's abstract of judgment must be corrected to reflect that the sentence on count 4 is stayed pursuant to section 654. Accordingly, the Court modified the judgment as to Abernathy and Jordan to award an additional day of presentence custody credit, and the Court ordered that the abstract of judgment be corrected as to Jones to accurately reflect that his sentence on count 4 is stayed. In all other respects, the judgments were affirmed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.