People v. Campa CA6
Filed 11/14/13 P. v. Campa CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, H039763 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. C1349537)
v.
ISAAC JOSEPH CAMPA,
Defendant and Appellant.
I. INTRODUCTION Defendant Isaac Joseph Campa pleaded no contest to second degree burglary (Pen. Code, §§459, 460, subd. (b).)1 In accordance with the plea agreement, the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation on the condition that he serve eight months in the county jail. Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal, and we appointed counsel to represent him in this court. Appointed counsel has filed an opening brief that states the case and facts but raises no issue. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf within 30 days. The 30-day period has elapsed and we have received no response from defendant.
1 All statutory references hereafter are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have reviewed the entire record. Following the California Supreme Court’s direction in People v. Kelly, supra, at page 110, we provide “a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed.” II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND On the morning of February 6, 2013, the victim and her 13-year-old daughter were at home in San Jose. At about 9:00 a.m., the victim opened the garage door to retrieve her garbage cans from the street. She then saw a man facing the front of her house. He put his hood on his head and his hands in his pockets, and started to walk away. The victim closed her garage door and went inside her house. About an hour later, at approximately 10:00 a.m., a man rang the doorbell of the victim’s house. The victim saw him talking on a cell phone and heard him mention her address. She did not answer the door, which was locked and did not open when the doorknob was “wiggled.” While the victim and her daughter were in the master bedroom, the victim heard noises at the rear sliding glass door. The victim and her daughter hid in a walk-in closet and called 911. Police officers arrived and searched the house. They found a shovel in the victim’s bedroom, which the victim stated she had not brought into the house. Additionally, the officers found gold jewelry on the ground underneath the window that the victim identified as hers. The victim also reported that some money from her wallet and some of her jewelry were missing. Around the time of the burglary, the victim’s neighbor and his wife were leaving their home in their car. The neighbor saw two men jump over the victim’s backyard fence and depart in a Honda Civic parked at the curb. After the neighbor’s wife made an unsuccessful attempt to take a photograph, the couple followed the Honda Civic as it ran through several stop signs and red lights without stopping. During the chase, the
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)