People v. Huerta CA6

Filed 5/22/25 P. v. Huerta CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H051736 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. C2200130)

v.

ELIAS MENDEZ HUERTA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Elias Mendez Huerta entered a plea of no contest to two counts of sexual penetration by force upon a minor 14 years or older (victim E.P.) and one count of lewd and lascivious conduct upon a minor under the age of 14 (victim E.H.). The trial court imposed the stipulated aggregate prison term of 19 years. On appeal, defendant’s appointed counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) that states the case, facts and procedural history, but raises no issues. We notified Huerta of his right to submit a written argument on his own behalf, and he filed two handwritten letters. In one of his letters, he denied touching E.P., and alleged that she threatened to falsely accuse him of crimes because he would not buy her an expensive computer. Huerta noted that E.P. also threatened to call the police to protect her family member from Huerta’s drinking. In his second letter, Huerta stated that his daughter, E.H, had recanted the allegations 10 years before this case was filed because they were lies based on an accident.

We carefully reviewed the entire record pursuant to Wende, supra 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106 (Kelly) and we determined there are no arguable issues on appeal that would result in a more favorable disposition to Huerta. We affirm the judgment. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Procedural Background In January 2022, the Santa Clara District Attorney’s Office charged Huerta in a complaint with two counts of sexual penetration by force (Pen. Code, § 289, subd. (a)(1)(C))1, one count of lewd and lascivious conduct (§ 288, subd. (a)); two counts of lewd or lascivious act on a child of 14-15 years (§ 288, subd. (c)(1)), and a single count of annoying or molesting a child (§ 647.6, subd (a)(1)). As to the first three counts, the prosecution alleged Huerta committed the offenses against more than one victim and upon a child under the age of 14, pursuant to section 667.61, subdivision (j)(2). On October 17, 2022, in exchange for a stipulated sentence of 19 years in state prison, Huerta entered a plea of no contest to two counts of sexual penetration by force and one count of lewd or lascivious conduct, and the prosecution dismissed the remaining charges and the habitual sexual offender allegations, which had exposed Huerta to a life sentence. A sentencing hearing was set for January 20, 2023. The defendant then filed a motion to withdraw his plea pursuant to section 1018 on February 23, 2023. Two of the victims, E.P. and E.H., were represented by counsel. Before Huerta entered his plea, defense counsel was advised by victims’ counsel that her clients would testify against Huerta. Huerta and counsel later learned that the victims were planning to recant their statements. Huerta’s counsel would not have advised Huerta to accept the plea deal if he had known two of the alleged victims were not cooperative. Huerta submitted two typed letters from E.P. and E.H. indicating that they