People v. Majewski CA3

Filed 11/12/13 P. v. Majewski CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE, C071314

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 11F5266)

v.

SHAWN MICHAEL MAJEWSKI,

Defendant and Appellant.

After a bench trial at which documentary evidence only was presented, the trial court convicted defendant Shawn Michael Majewski of seven counts of second degree

1

burglary (Pen. Code, § 459; counts 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 13, 14)1 and three counts of petty theft, a misdemeanor (§ 488; counts 4, 7, 8), and found a strike prior (§ 1170.12) to be true. Sentenced to state prison, defendant appeals. He contends (1) insufficient evidence supports his conviction on counts 5, 6, 7, 8, and 13; and (2) the single larceny doctrine applies to bar his conviction on count 7 or 8. We reject defendant’s contentions and will affirm the judgment. FACTS Counts 1 and 2 On September 10, 2010, employees at Strange and Son Fencing (SSF) locked up the business for the weekend. At 10:49 a.m. on September 11, 2010, the security company called an SSF employee to notify him that the alarm at the business had been triggered, but the employee missed the call. About 1:30 p.m. on September 12, 2010, the SSF employee went to the business and discovered that the alarm had been triggered, two holes had been cut in the perimeter fence, windows on two work trucks had been forced open, and a cell phone had been taken. Defendant’s fingerprints were found on the windows of both trucks. Defendant was not an SSF employee and had no permission to be near the trucks. Counts 3 On September 4, 2010, Rodney Rogers, who had parked and left his truck in front of a repair shop the day before, found that someone had entered the unlocked camper shell, pried open the rear sliding window of the truck, and stole a pair of binoculars and some change. Defendant’s palm prints and fingerprint were found on the rear sliding window of the truck. Ten months later when defendant was interviewed, he did not recall