People v. Manry CA1/1

Filed 5/30/14 P. v. Manry CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A138541 v. ADAM AARON MANRY, (Solano County Super. Ct. No. FCR293437) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Adam Aaron Manry was convicted of first degree residential burglary, on an aiding and abetting theory, after he was found with recently stolen goods in his car. Defendant contends there was insufficient evidence to establish he possessed the requisite felonious intent. Because we find substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND Defendant, along with codefendant Christian Paynes, was charged with one count of first degree residential burglary in an information dated September 4, 2012. (Pen. Code, § 459.) Defendant’s trial was severed from that of Paynes. Defendant and Paynes arrived at the Vacaville home of the victim, a high school student, early on the morning of May 22, 2012. Paynes had offered to drive the victim to school, but defendant drove them in his car because Paynes was unable to drive. Paynes had known the victim for several years, but defendant had met him only recently, when the three played video games at the victim’s home. Defendant did not enter the home that morning, but before leaving, Paynes used the restroom. On the drive to school,

Paynes played music on his cell phone. While the three were driving around before dropping the victim off, defendant asked the victim if he intended to skip school that day. Just before 8:30 a.m., defendant and Paynes returned to the victim’s residence, purportedly to retrieve Paynes’s cell phone. The victim’s mother let Paynes into the home to look for his phone, which he did not find. Defendant and Paynes left in defendant’s car, and the victim’s mother left for work. Sometime between 9:30 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., defendant and Paynes made a third trip to the victim’s residence. A neighbor saw one person walk through the side gate of the victim’s home and a second person, generally fitting defendant’s description, walk away from the home down the driveway. When the victim’s mother returned home around noon, she noticed the screen was removed from the back kitchen window and the back door was unlocked. She then noticed three video game systems, a PlayStation 3, an Xbox 360, and a Nintendo Wii, along with other equipment, were missing from her living room. A few hours later, she called the Vacaville police and gave them the serial number of the missing Nintendo Wii. At 10:47 a.m., defendant and another person sold a PlayStation 3 at a video game store in Vacaville, providing defendant’s driver’s license. Later in the day, they returned to the store and sold an Xbox 360 game console and hard drive. That night, a Vacaville police officer drove to defendant’s home and found him with Paynes. After the officer arrested them, he searched defendant’s car and found a Nintendo Wii system with a serial number matching the one provided by the victim’s mother. During the subsequent interview at the police station, defendant initially claimed he had not returned to the victim’s residence a third time that day. After further questioning, he acknowledged returning to the victim’s home a third time at Paynes’s request, but he maintained ignorance as to Paynes’s purpose until after Paynes left the home with the Nintendo Wii. Defendant eventually conceded he knew Paynes had his cell phone with him the whole time and had returned to the residence a third time with the intention of taking the systems. The jury convicted defendant of burglary, and he was sentenced to three years’ probation.