People v. Rogers CA1/5

Filed 5/14/14 P. v. Rogers CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A139572 v. ALAN ROGERS, (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC077132) Defendant and Appellant.

A jury convicted defendant and appellant Alan Rogers of two misdemeanors, battery and false imprisonment. Appellant’s counsel has raised no issue on appeal and asks this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Appellant has not filed a supplemental brief. We find no arguable issues and affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In December 2012, appellant was charged by information with one felony count of battery (Pen. Code, § 243, subd. (c)(1)); one felony count of false imprisonment (Pen. Code, § 236); and one misdemeanor count of petty theft (Pen. Code, § 484). In March 2013, the information was amended to add a misdemeanor battery count (Pen. Code, § 242) and a misdemeanor false imprisonment count (Pen. Code, § 236). The felony battery and false imprisonment counts were dismissed.

1

The jury found appellant not guilty of petty theft but convicted him of misdemeanor battery and false imprisonment. The trial court sentenced appellant to 30 days in county jail, with credit for 30 days time served. The court also imposed a conviction assessment of $30, an operations assessment of $40, and a $140 restitution fund fine, plus a $154 collection fee. This appeal followed.1 FACTUAL BACKGROUND On the evening of June 2, 2011, process server Donald Schlipp went to serve an unlawful detainer and/or eviction papers on appellant and his friend Ulla Jacobson in Redwood City. The location was a storage yard for heavy machinery surrounded by a fence; appellant and Jacobson were residing in a shipping container on the property. Schlipp testified he parked outside the property, approached the open gate, and yelled appellant’s name. He heard a voice telling him to come in, so he entered the property and walked down a narrow path until he encountered Jacobson. He identified himself, explained he was there to serve legal documents, and handed the papers to Jacobson. Suddenly, appellant emerged angry and yelling out of a shipping container. Appellant accused Schlipp of trespassing and of breaking the law by serving papers after 5:00 p.m. Appellant blocked the exit and told Schlipp he was under citizen’s arrest. Appellant also struck Schlipp twice with a closed fist, slapped him, and pushed him to the ground. Schlipp did not try to hit appellant. On appellant’s instructions Jacobson blocked the path to the exit with boxes. Eventually police arrived and escorted Schlipp from the property. A police officer who responded to the scene testified appellant claimed he had been assaulted with a flashlight, although the officer saw no injury. Schlipp’s nose was red and swollen, and he had a minor injury to his lower lip. The officer observed that