People v. Yang CA5

Filed 9/19/14 P. v. Yang 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F066419 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F12904100) v.

SOR YANG, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Jonathan B. Conklin and John F. Vogt, Judges.† Scott N. Cameron, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Carlos A. Martinez and Jamie A. Scheidegger, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Detjen, J., and Franson, J. † Judge Conklin heard appellant’s motion to substitute counsel. Judge Vogt presided over appellant’s trial and sentencing hearing.

INTRODUCTION Appellant Sor Yang was charged, in an information filed on June 26, 2012, with sexual intercourse or sodomy with a child 10 years of age or younger (Pen. Code, § 288.7, subd. (a), count 1)1 and a lewd or lascivious act on a child under the age of 14 years (§ 288, subd. (a), count 2). The information was filed after appellant was held to answer at the conclusion of a preliminary hearing on June 20, 2012. Appellant was represented by Franz Criego. Appellant brought a motion pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden) to have Mr. Criego relieved as his trial counsel. After a hearing on September 20, 2012, the trial court denied appellant’s Marsden motion. At the conclusion of a court trial on October 12, 2012, appellant was found guilty of both counts. On November 9, 2012, appellant was sentenced on count 1 to a prison term of 25 years to life. The court stayed appellant’s term of eight years on count 2 pursuant to section 654. Appellant contends the trial court erred in denying his Marsden motion. We affirm the judgment. FACTS Offense At the time of trial, G.X. was seven years old and attending the third grade. G.X. lived with her mother (P.X.), a brother, appellant, and appellant’s children. P.X. was married to appellant. G.X. and P.X. explained that one evening in June 2012, appellant called G.X. into the bedroom after she had showered and dressed. G.X. said that appellant asked two of his children that were in the room to leave. G.X. testified that once she was in the bedroom, appellant locked the bedroom door, turned on the television, and closed the window. G.X. explained that appellant