People v. Juarez CA4/1
Filed 1/13/25 P. v. Juarez CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, D082954
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD296298)
ORLANDO HERNANDEZ JUAREZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Jeffrey F. Fraser, Judge. Affirmed in part and dismissed in part. Theresa Osterman Stevenson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina and Alan L. Amann, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. A jury decided—as a matter of fact—that Orlando Hernandez Juarez inflicted great bodily injury on his girlfriend when he beat, bit, and strangled her before raping her. On appeal, Juarez contends the jury’s finding of great
bodily injury is not supported by substantial evidence. But the record here supports the jury’s finding, so we affirm on that point. We dismiss the remainder of Juarez’s appeal without prejudice given his subsequent resentencing and pending appeal on those issues. I. A jury found Juarez guilty of forcible rape (Pen. Code, § 261, subd. (a)(2); count 1); corporal injury to a person with whom he was in a dating relationship (§ 273.5(a); count 2); false imprisonment by violence or menace (§ 236/237(a); count 3); and attempting to dissuade a witness from reporting a crime (§ 136.1(b)(1); count 4). For count 2, the jury also found true that, in the commission of the offense, Juarez personally inflicted great bodily injury on the victim under circumstances involving domestic violence. (§ 12022.7(e).) We limit our description of the facts to those relevant to the great bodily injury finding. A. At trial, the victim, Lilia T., testified about what happened the evening Juarez raped her. The evening started with Lilia bringing her car over to Juarez’s residence so he could change its oil. Juarez and Lilia had been dating for a few months. When Lilia heard a commotion nearby and asked Juarez about it, he told Lilia it was none of her business and pushed her inside the residence. Once inside, Juarez pulled Lilia’s hand so hard he fractured her pinky finger. He then punched her in the face—hard—“several” times. After pushing Lilia into his bedroom and locking her in, Juarez “continued beating [her] up, hitting [her].” He strangled Lilia until she could
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)