People v. Overton CA1/5

Filed 5/28/14 P. v. Overton CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, A140440 v. TRAVIS SENTEL OVERTON, (Solano County Super. Ct. No. VCR212944) Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant Travis Sentel Overton was convicted by jury of two counts of robbery, and the jury found that a principal was armed with a handgun in the commission of these offenses. Assigned counsel has submitted a Wende1 brief, certifying that counsel has been unable to identify any issues for appellate review. Counsel has also submitted a declaration confirming that Overton has been advised of his right to personally file a supplemental brief raising any points which he wishes to call to the court’s attention. No supplemental brief has been submitted. As required, we have independently reviewed the record. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109–110.) We find no error and affirm. I. BACKGROUND Overton was charged by amended information with two counts of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 212.5).2 An enhancement under Penal Code section 12022, subdivision (a)(1) (principal armed with a handgun) was alleged as to each count. An

1 People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. 2 A codefendant, Rork Parker, was jointly charged.

1

initial trial resulted in mistrial when the jury was unable to reach a verdict as to Overton.3 Retrial commenced on September 24, 2013. We recite trial evidence supporting the verdict. (People v. Hovarter (2008) 44 Cal.4th 983, 996–997 [entire record is reviewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution to see if “ ‘ “ ‘ “any rational trier of fact” ’ could have been so persuaded” ’ ”].) On June 28, 2011, at about 1:40 p.m., two men wearing black ski masks entered the U.S. Bank in Benicia, California. One of the men held a two-toned, semi-automatic handgun. He pointed the gun at bank tellers S.M. and D.B. He directed a customer to get on the floor. The second masked man leapt over the counter and directed S.M. and D.B. to the bank’s vault. He yelled at D.B. to “hurry up, bitch,” and threatened to “blow [her] fucking head off.” When the vault was opened, the man with the gun pushed D.B. into the vault room. The man who had leapt over the counter took currency and boxes of coins from the vault and put them into a blue bag. The men left the bank and got into a small black SUV which was parked directly in front of the bank. A third person was in the driver’s seat of the SUV. Ten surveillance cameras at the bank recorded the incident. The surveillance video was played for the jury. A witness pulled up to the bank while the incident was occurring and, through the bank’s front glass windows, saw a body go across the counter top. Believing a robbery might be in progress, the witness attempted to call police, but was unable to do so. He saw two men in dark clothing come out of the bank and get into a black car which had backed into a parking space in front of the bank. One of the men went into the back of the car, and the other entered a passenger side door. Neither man got into the driver’s seat. As the vehicle drove away, the witness took photos of the car and its license plate with his cell phone. When the police arrived at the bank, the witness gave them a description of the car and showed them the photos. The bank had a global positioning system (GPS) device hidden in bait money in D.B.’s teller drawer. The device was disguised as a bundle of $20 bills. The device was