People v. Perry CA2/7
Filed 10/16/25 P. v. Perry CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN
THE PEOPLE, B338775
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA150355) v.
LARRY EUGENE PERRY,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ricardo R. Ocampo, Judge. Affirmed. Jared G. Coleman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
__________________________
Larry Eugene Perry appeals after the trial court imposed a stipulated judgment of 19 years in state prison for sexual penetration by a foreign object of a minor 14 years old or older and forcible rape of a minor 14 years old or older. We appointed counsel to represent Perry on appeal. After reviewing the record, appointed counsel for Perry did not identify any arguable issues and asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). After independently reviewing the record, we have not identified any arguable issues either. We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
We described the factual background of this case in Perry’s first appeal. (See People v. Perry (Nov. 3, 2023, B314950) [nonpub. opn.].) At Perry’s request, Nakeya, Perry’s adult daughter, gained custody of S.P., her half-sister and Perry’s daughter. At that time, S.P. was 11 or 12 years old. S.P.’s mother had died and, before Nakeya obtained custody, S.P. had been in foster care. S.P. testified that, when she was 12 years old and visiting Perry, he directed her to take down her pants and underwear and get on the bed. S.P. felt “weird[ed] out,” but followed Perry’s directions. Perry donned disposable latex gloves, “like doctor gloves,” he took from his nightstand. Perry told S.P. he was going to put his finger inside her vagina and told her to lie down, then put his fingers inside her and moved them around. After he stopped, he told S.P. to put her clothes back on, and S.P. asked why he had put his fingers inside her. Perry replied it was “to see if [you’re] a virgin.” Perry told S.P. he would get in trouble with the police and go to jail if she told Nakeya what happened,
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)