People v. Wondafrash CA4/3

Filed 7/21/25 P. v. Wondafrash 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G063927

v. (Super. Ct. No. 19HF0422)

DAGIM WONDAFRASH, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert A. Knox, Judge. Affirmed. Richard Schwartzberg, 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, Christopher P. Beesley and Kristen Kinnaird Chenelia, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Dagim Wondafrash appeals from a judgment convicting him of 1 misdemeanor false imprisonment. (Pen. Code, §§ 236, 237, subd (a).) It is undisputed the prosecutor improperly argued during closing arguments that a past conviction showed Wondafrash had a propensity to commit the false imprisonment. We nevertheless conclude the error was harmless and affirm. FACTS Wondafrash encountered N.C. while the two were separately driving toward a freeway at night. Wondafrash believed N.C. tailgated him and “nudge[d]” his bumper. Wondafrash followed N.C. into a residential neighborhood and parked behind her. He commanded N.C. to exit her vehicle and knocked multiple times on her window, requesting her license and registration. He wore sunglasses and behaved in a manner that caused N.C. to wonder if Wondafrash was a law enforcement officer. Residents in the neighborhood became involved and Wondafrash engaged with them, at one point calling a resident an expletive. N.C. felt scared to exit her vehicle and called 9-1-1, resulting in a 24-minute recorded phone call in which Wondafrash’s interactions with residents could be heard. Sheriff’s deputies arrived and arrested Wondafrash. He was charged with felony false imprisonment. (§§ 236, 237, subd. (a).) At trial, Wondafrash confirmed he had been convicted of a felony four years before his interactions with N.C. After the close of evidence, the court instructed the jury on felony false imprisonment, including the element of menace. It defined “menace” as “a verbal or physical threat of harm. The threat of harm may be express or implied.” (CALCRIM No. 1240.) It also