People v. Kennedy CA2/2

Filed 8/4/14 P. v. Kennedy CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, B247076

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA395971) v.

TYRONE KENNEDY,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. William N. Sterling, Judge. Affirmed.

Helen S. Irza, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, James William Bilderback II, Steven E. Mercer and Alene M. Games, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

___________________________________________________

The trial court revoked appellant Tyrone Kennedy’s probation and imposed the previously suspended sentence. Appellant’s sole claim on appeal is that the trial court should have ordered a supplemental probation report. We reject this contention and affirm. We first summarize the evidence that led to the revocation of appellant’s probation.

TESTIMONY AT THE PROBATION REVOCATION HEARING On November 22, 2011, appellant and Betsye Cooper were “cohabitating” in a tent. Cooper had been living in the tent with appellant for about five months. Appellant was with Cooper pretty much every night. On the evening of November 22, 2011, appellant asked Cooper for money but she refused his request because she felt they needed the money for basic food needs. Appellant and Cooper began to argue. After Cooper refused to give appellant the money, appellant pushed Cooper down in the tent, got on top of her and put his hands around her neck. Appellant kept squeezing Cooper’s neck for several minutes with both hands. While appellant was on top of Cooper, she felt as if she “lost minutes somewhere,” that “there was a space that I didn’t know what was going on at all” and “everything faded away.” When Cooper “came to,” appellant was no longer choking her, but was still sitting on top of her. She pushed appellant off, got out of the tent as fast as she could, ran down the street and flagged the police. As a result of the choking, Cooper had marks on her neck and her neck was sore for three or four days. There were also red marks on the side of her neck, close to her collarbone. The red marks below Cooper’s neck ensued from being pushed on by appellant and Cooper’s pushing appellant to get him off of her. The police took pictures of the marks on Cooper’s neck. Cooper testified that appellant appeared to be under the influence of alcohol based on his behavior; however, she did not see appellant drinking that day. On the date of the