People v. Farmer CA3

Filed 1/31/14 P. v. Farmer CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Calaveras) ----

THE PEOPLE, C072339

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 12F5403)

v.

ROBERT LARS FARMER,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Robert Lars Farmer guilty of burning an inhabited structure or property. (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (b).)1 A count of attempted arson of a structure (§ 455) was dismissed. Defendant was sentenced to prison for the upper term of eight years. On appeal, defendant contends his conviction is not supported by sufficient evidence of burning, in violation of his Fourteenth Amendment rights. We affirm.

1 Further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

1

FACTS Prosecution Case-in-Chief Daniel Hill has lived on Summit View Drive in Arnold for many years. Hill’s parents and his two children from a prior relationship also lived at the residence. Jill Cook, the girlfriend of Hill and the mother of their seven-month-old daughter, lived half of the time with Hill and half of the time with her parents. On March 11, 2012, around 2:00 a.m., Hill rode a bicycle to a location where Cook had parked his truck. Hill encountered defendant, an acquaintance who lived down the street from Hill. Defendant was walking down the road carrying a gasoline can. He passed by Hill as Hill got into the truck. When Hill drove away, he noticed a gasoline can nozzle lying in the road. Hill picked up the nozzle, slowed the truck as he passed by defendant, and attempted to return the nozzle to him. Defendant ignored Hill, who then drove home. Defendant continued walking in the direction of Hill’s residence. Hill thought that defendant’s behavior was odd. Still hoping to return the gas nozzle, Hill remained outside his residence and waited for defendant to walk by. But defendant never arrived. Instead, Hill heard some rustling in the bushes behind his residence. After walking around the side of the house and down some stairs, Hill saw “all the trees at the back of the house, just lit up from the light of the fire.” Hill saw that part of a wooden post supporting the elevated deck was on fire. Hill tossed dirt on the fire to extinguish the flame. The process took a minute or two. The fire did not want to extinguish itself and would have continued to burn. Hill extinguished the flame before it did any structural damage. The fire left the wood “black.” On cross- examination, Hill testified that the fire “didn’t actually char” the post. He explained, “Just the surface [of the post] was burned black[; the fire] didn’t actually char it.” While Hill was fighting the fire, he saw defendant running up to the road and heard him uttering nonsensical comments about Hill having raped defendant’s mother.