P. v. Escalona CA4/3

Filed 7/22/13 P. v. Escalona CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G046747

v. (Super. Ct. No. 10SF0012)

DANIEL ESCALONA, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, M. Marc Kelly, Judge. Affirmed. Patrick Morgan Ford, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Melissa Mandel and Warren Williams, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

Defendant Daniel Escalona appeals his felony convictions arising out of his shooting Edgar Campos, contending his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the admission of Campos‟s earlier statements to law enforcement. We reject the argument as the evidence was properly admitted and counsel has no obligation to raise meritless objections. I FACTS The issue raised by defendant does not require a full recitation of the facts. The following suffices. The district attorney filed an information in the Orange County Superior Court charging defendant, Andy Castellanos, Michael Torres, and Edgar Caudillo with the deliberate and premeditated attempted murder of Campos (Pen. Code,1 §§ 187, subd. (a), 664, subd. (a); count one), assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2); count two), use of force against a witness (§ 140, subd. (a); count three) and active participation in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a)). The information further alleged defendant personally discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)), personally used a firearm (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)), and personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). It also alleged the remaining defendants vicariously discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subds. (d), (e)(1)) and were vicariously armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)). Additionally, as to each defendant, the information alleged counts one, two, and three were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)).2