People v. Yerger CA3
Filed 7/18/24 P. v. Yerger CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----
THE PEOPLE, C098269
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 22FE009005)
v.
CHARLES JAY YERGER III,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appointed counsel for defendant Charles Jay Yerger III filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable errors that would result in a disposition more favorable to Yerger, we will affirm the judgment.
1
BACKGROUND On May 30, 2022, at around 10:00 p.m., two police officers interviewed A.L. regarding a report that she had been assaulted with a deadly weapon and threatened. A.L. stated that around 2:00 in the morning, she was at an apartment and Yerger was “getting sloppy drunk” and waving a loaded firearm around. Yerger acted sexually aggressive toward A.L. and other women present. A.L. told Yerger to put the gun away. Yerger said, “[S]hut up[,] bitch. You disrespecting me[,] bitch.” Yerger pointed the firearm at A.L. She told him again to put the gun away. Yerger got on top of A.L. so that she could not move. A.L. kicked Yerger off, and he slapped her face and squeezed it. Later that day, at around 4:00 or 5:00 p.m., Yerger returned to the apartment. After the first incident, A.L. had posted “fuck the heights,” because she was angry. Yerger told A.L. to delete the post from her Instagram feed. Yerger tried to take A.L.’s cell phone. A.L. said she would delete the post. She was in her room lying in bed. Yerger grabbed A.L. by her hair, pulled out his gun and said, “I should have pistol whipped you bitch.” Yerger threatened to shoot A.L. He pressed the gun barrel against her forehead. A.L. showed the officers photographs of Yerger on social media. A.L. told them that Yerger keeps his gun in a compartment by the steering wheel in his Chevy Impala. A.L. described the firearm as an army green and black Smith & Wesson handgun. The officers also interviewed J.P., who witnessed the first incident and described it in substantially similar fashion as A.L. J.P. did not witness the second incident. J.P. echoed A.L.’s description of Yerger’s handgun and the spot where it was located in his car. Later that night, A.L. sent a text to one of the officers stating that she did not want to press charges, because she feared retaliation by Yerger. On May 31, 2022, the Sacramento County Sheriff’s Office used facial recognition software to identify Yerger and found an address for Yerger and a Chevrolet Impala registered to him. On June 1, 2022, a detective with the Sacramento County Sheriff’s
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)