People v. Enriquez CA2/6

Filed 1/22/14 P. v. Enriquez CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B243811 (Super. Ct. No. 2012004187) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v.

ANDREW ENRIQUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Andrew Enriquez appeals from a judgment following his conviction by jury of corporal injury to a spouse/cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5),1 and assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), with special findings that he inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (e)), and used a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). Appellant admitted a prior conviction and three prison term enhancements (§§ 273.5, subd. (e), 667.5, subd. (b)), and was sentenced to a total of 14 years in state prison. Appellant contends the trial court erred by providing the jury with only a portion of the written instructions on propensity evidence and assault with a deadly weapon. We affirm.

FACTS

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Nicole T. arrived at a hospital emergency room around 9:00 a.m. on November 3, 2011. She had a ruptured right eardrum, with resultant hearing loss, a scalp laceration and a skull fracture. Doctors closed the laceration with staples. Her hearing loss persisted for another month. She told hospital personnel and Officer Jack Ortega that her "boyfriend" had struck her with a power tool. She hesitated to tell Ortega what had occurred and did not initially identify appellant as her boyfriend because she feared incriminating him. After conducting some research, Ortega returned to the hospital and told Nicole that he believed appellant was her boyfriend. She started to cry. She did not deny that appellant was her boyfriend or identify anyone else as her boyfriend. While at the hospital, Nicole discovered she was pregnant with appellant's child. She asked a long-time friend, Sarah Hoyland, to come to the hospital. When Hoyland arrived, Nicole told her that appellant had struck her in the head with a power tool, but said she did not want to get him into trouble. Officer Teddy Symonds interviewed Nicole the next day. Once again, she was reluctant to speak about the incident. She said she feared retaliation from appellant, although she still loved him. She said she had dated appellant earlier, but during a period he was in jail, she had started seeing another man. Upon appellant's release, she resumed her relationship with appellant and ended the other one. Nicole told Symonds that on the day of the incident, appellant began looking at her cell phone. He saw text messages she had sent to the other man as well as a video of her performing a sexual act on herself. She said appellant became enraged and struck her on the head with a power tool, knocking her to the ground. Although she had difficulty remembering exactly what occurred after she was struck, she recalled that appellant took her to the hospital. She was adamant that she did not want appellant to be prosecuted. Symonds discovered that appellant, who was on parole, was residing at Sheryl Cano's apartment. Cano handed police officers the key to the apartment, giving them permission to enter. As Symonds was unlocking the door, appellant started to