People v. Gomez CA4/3

Filed 1/21/14 P. v. Gomez CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G048828

v. (Super. Ct. No. 12CF2517)

VICTOR MARTIARENA GOMEZ, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, James A. Stotler, Judge. Affirmed. Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

A jury found defendant Victor Martiarena Gomez guilty of aggravated assault on Detective Duran, Detective Chacon, Detective Zuniga, Sergeant Paulson, Detective Salo and Detective Gutierrez in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (c), as charged in counts one through six of the information. (Unless otherwise indicated, all statutory references are to the Penal Code.) Defendant was also found guilty of violating Vehicle Code sections 2800.2 and 12500, evading while driving recklessly and driving without a license, but pursuant to the prosecutor’s motion, count 10, driving without a license, was dismissed. The jury found defendant not guilty of violating section 422, making criminal threats as charged in count eight. With regard to count nine, battery of Courtney Griffin, the jury informed the court there was no reasonable probability they would arrive at a verdict, and the court dismissed count nine. The court sentenced defendant to three years in state prison. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed a brief which set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against the client, but advised the court no issues were found to argue on defendant’s behalf. Counsel did not suggest any areas of inquiry, but requested this court “independently review the entire record on appeal for arguable issues.” We have examined the record and found no arguable issue. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was given 30 days to file written argument in defendant’s own behalf. That period has passed, and we have received no communication from defendant. Nonetheless we have read defendant’s lengthy description of the facts, which he told the court he personally prepared for the probation department. I FACTS The Initial Incident On August 22, 2013, Courtney Griffin, an auto detailer, was dropping an employee, Adam Van Sickle, off at his home in Santa Ana. The two were sitting in