People v. Butler CA5

Filed 6/23/14 P. v. Butler CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F065030

v. (Super. Ct. No. BF133681A)

MARC DAVID BUTLER, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. John R. Brownlee, Judge. Hassan Gorguinpour, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Kane, J., and Poochigian, J.

A jury convicted appellant, Marc David Butler, of elder abuse (Pen. Code, § 368, subd. (b)(1);1 count 1) and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1); count 2), and found true enhancement allegations that in committing each offense appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury on a non-accomplice (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). The court imposed a prison term of seven years, consisting of the four-year upper term on the count 1 offense plus three years on the accompanying enhancement. On count 2 the court imposed, and stayed pursuant to section 654, an identical seven-year prison term. Appellant’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d. 436.) In response to this court’s invitation to submit additional briefing, appellant has submitted a letter in which he raises various claims which we discuss below.2 We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Facts – Prosecution Case Glenda Rettick testified that in September 2010, appellant, who Rettick had known for approximately 16 years, was living in her house, paying no rent but working for her as a handyman.3 Rettick was 69 years old at the time, and she had told appellant her age more than once.