People v. Solis CA2/6

Filed 12/18/13 P. v. Solis CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B235384 (Super. Ct. No. BA341563) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

OSCAR SOLIS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Oscar Solis appeals from the judgment following his conviction by jury of first degree murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 189)1 and attempted murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a)). The jury found multiple personal firearm use allegations to be true. (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c) & (d).) Appellant moved for a new trial. The trial court denied his motion and sentenced him to prison for 84 years to life. Appellant contends he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. He also contends, and respondent agrees, the abstract does not accurately reflect the judgment. We affirm but direct the trial court to correct errors in abstract of judgment form CR292 and to prepare an abstract of judgment form CR290.

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated. There were two trials in this matter; the first ended in a mistrial when the jury could not reach a verdict.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Prosecution Evidence Omar Sorroza-Garcia (Sorroza) knew David Juarez for several years. They were business partners who manufactured (cooked) and sold methamphetamine. Juarez obtained pseudoephedrine, an essential methamphetamine ingredient, from different suppliers, including Daniel Rodriguez, who lived with appellant. Juarez paid pseudoephedrine suppliers from proceeds of sales of the resultant methamphetamine. After Rodriguez died, Juarez found another supplier. Juarez also cooked methamphetamine for appellant to sell. Sorroza knew appellant, but had no business relationship with him. On one occasion, Juarez burned a batch of methamphetamine he cooked using pseudoephedrine supplied by appellant. The product was not fit to sell. Appellant accused Juarez of selling the product and falsely claiming it was burned, and they engaged in an ongoing dispute. Appellant called to complain with such frequency that Juarez eventually stopped answering his calls. Otylynda Delgado, his common-law wife, would answer and tell appellant Juarez was not home. Juarez's neighbor, Horacio Smiley, sometimes worked as his armed bodyguard. Smiley went to Juarez's residence in early 2003, when appellant was due there. Appellant arrived with two men, including his constant companion, Calvin Belloso (Oso). Appellant demanded that Juarez pay him, or give him Juarez's truck. Smiley separated appellant and Juarez to prevent a physical altercation. Smiley also displayed a gun, and told appellant to leave. Appellant complied. Juarez later told Delgado appellant had threatened his life. Juarez bought a gun and never left the house without it. On a subsequent occasion, Juarez was meeting appellant at a restaurant. Smiley accompanied Juarez, and observed a pistol and an AK-47 rifle in appellant's parked car. On March 16, 2003, Juarez drove his car, with Sorroza in the front passenger seat. They picked up Smiley and took him to his apartment at the corner of Jefferson and West Boulevards. Juarez waited in his car with Sorroza while Smiley was inside.