The People v. Wang CA2/3
Filed 9/26/13 P. v. Wang CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE, B239035
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA092570) v.
STANLEY XUESHI WANG
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Douglas Sortino, Judge. Affirmed. Verna Wefald, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr. and David F. Glassman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________
Defendant and appellant, Stanley Xueshi Wang, appeals his conviction for first degree murder with an enhancement for personal use of a dangerous weapon (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 12022). He was sentenced to state prison for a term of 26 years to life. The judgment is affirmed. BACKGROUND Viewed in accordance with the usual rule of appellate review (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206), the evidence established the following. 1. Prosecution evidence. Defendant Wang and the victim, Yang Yang, were married in China and subsequently moved to the United States. At the time Yang was killed, in November 2010,1 they had a four-year-old daughter, Tiffany. Hong Moc testified he and Yang met at church in September 2010, and became romantically involved. Yang began staying at Moc’s house three or four nights a week, and then moved in with him in November. Tiffany stayed with Yang and Moc on the weekends, and with Wang during the week. On November 9 or 10, Moc accompanied Yang to consult a divorce attorney. On November 12, Wang called 911 to report he had just returned from a one-week trip overseas to discover that his wife had taken their daughter and was refusing to tell him where she was located.2 Deputy Sheriff Ray Huang responded to the call. Wang told Huang he had returned from a business trip to find that his wife and daughter were no longer at the apartment: “[Wang] stated that his wife took all her belongings and her daughter’s belongings and possibly had moved in
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)