People v. Nunez CA2/3
Filed 12/12/13 P. v. Nunez CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE
THE PEOPLE, B241377
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA118284) v.
FRANCISCO ARTURO NUNEZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Dewey Falcone, Judge. Affirmed as modified. Ava R. Stralla, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and David E. Madeo, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_________________________
Defendant and appellant, Francisco Arturo Nunez, appeals his conviction for attempted murder, aggravated mayhem, torture and corporal injury to a child’s parent, with a great bodily injury enhancement. (Pen. Code, §§ 664, 187, 205, 206, 273.5, 12022.7).1 He was sentenced to state prison for a term of life. The judgment is affirmed as modified. BACKGROUND Viewed in accordance with the usual rule of appellate review (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206), the evidence established the following. On the afternoon of January 1, 2011, Maribel Rebolledo, who has a child with defendant Nunez, visited him at his residence in Hawaiian Gardens. Nunez lived in a detached garage next to a house. Rebolledo testified that when she arrived, Nunez and two friends were celebrating New Year’s Day. Rebolledo had not seen Nunez for a while, but that day they were getting along: “I remember everything was right the whole way, like we weren’t arguing or anything. It was a nice conversation.” Rebolledo testified she was not depressed or suicidal that day. After Nunez’s two friends left, he and Rebolledo remained in the backyard by themselves. Sometime that evening, while she was still visiting Nunez, Rebolledo was severely burned after having been doused with gasoline. Rebolledo testified she had no memory of how this happened. She only remembered the ambulance taking her to the hospital, where she remained in intensive care for more than six months. She had sustained third degree burns from the top of her head to her waist; there were burns on her chest, stomach, neck, ears, arms and legs. All her fingers had to be amputated. By the time of trial, she had undergone several surgeries and was scheduled for more. Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Detective Dana Duncan, an arson investigator, responded to the hospital within 30 or 40 minutes of the first 911 call. When Duncan entered the emergency room, there was a very strong smell of gasoline and burnt flesh:
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)