People v. Diaz-Rondan CA1/1
Filed 7/31/25 P. v. Diaz-Rondan CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A171102 v. ISRAEL DIAZ-RONDAN, (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 01-23-00482) Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Israel Diaz-Rondan appeals from his conviction of five counts of first degree residential burglary and one count of grand theft firearm. He pled no contest to these charges following the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress under Penal Code1 section 1538.5. His counsel has filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, in which no issues are raised, and asks this court for an independent review of the record. After reviewing the record, we requested briefing from the parties as to whether the trial court correctly calculated the assessments required to be imposed under section 1465.8 and Government Code section 70373. Having reviewed the parties’ briefing, we modify the judgment to impose the correct amounts for the mandatory assessments and direct the trial court to amend
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
1
the abstract of judgment to reflect those modifications and to correct a clerical error. In all other respects, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND After a series of residential burglaries occurred over the span of two nights in neighboring cities, Detective Denny Cai obtained and executed a search warrant for an address registered to Diaz-Rondan’s sister, a Mercedes- Benz sedan registered to Diaz-Rodan’s alleged accomplice, Vidal Torres, and records for what was believed to be Diaz-Rondan’s phone number. The affidavit submitted by Detective Cai in support of the warrant stated, among other things, that a neighbor reported seeing a black or gray Mercedes-Benz sedan leaving the area of one of the burglaries that occurred on the first night. On the second night of burglaries, officers located a black Mercedes- Benz with a stolen license plate nearby, but the vehicle sped off. Cameras with automated license plate readers captured the Mercedes-Benz near one of the burglarized homes shortly before the burglary. Surveillance video showed a vehicle that Detective Cai recognized as a black Mercedes-Benz sedan with black wheels, a “Panoramic roof,” and dark-tinted rear windows. According to the affidavit, an officer from the San Mateo County Sherriff’s Office informed Detective Cai that the suspect vehicle for a residential burglary from a few months earlier was a black Mercedes-Benz. A witness had described the vehicle as a two-door model with tinted rear windows. Using “FLOCK,” a database containing information collected by cameras with automated license plate readers, the detective found one black Mercedes-Benz sedan near the place and time of the burglary. The vehicle’s license plate was recently stolen, and another search in FLOCK showed a black Mercedes-Benz sedan near the time and place of the license plate theft. That vehicle’s license plate number was registered to Torres. Torres’s vehicle
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)