People v. Pacheco CA2/2

Filed 12/30/14 P. v. Pacheco CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B253136

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA405511) v.

LOUIE CECIL PACHECO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Anne Harwood Egerton, Judge. Affirmed.

Victor J. Morse, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Shawn McGahey Webb and Ryan M. Smith, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________

In an information filed by the Los Angeles County District Attorney, defendant and appellant Louie Cecil Pacheco (Pacheco) was charged with first degree murder (Pen. Code § 187, subd. (a), count one)1 and two counts of assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)). It was further alleged as to count one that Pacheco personally and intentionally discharged a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). Finally, as to all counts, it was alleged that the offenses were committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in association with a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)). Pacheco pleaded not guilty and denied the special allegations. Trial was by jury. Pacheco was found guilty of murder and two counts of assault with a firearm. The jury made a true finding on the firearm allegation, but could not reach a verdict on the gang allegations. He was sentenced to 50 years to life plus five years in state prison. Various fines were imposed. Pacheco’s timely appeal ensued. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred when it allowed a police officer to testify to his lay opinion that Pacheco was the gunman depicted in a surveillance video of the apartment complex where the shooting occurred. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Prosecution Evidence A. The Shooting On or about November 26, 2012, at approximately 6:15 a.m., Denise Flores (Flores) was sitting on the back stairs of an apartment complex in Cypress Park. She saw a man walking through the alley. When the man asked Flores how to get into the building, she told him to go to the front door. The man left, but returned about two minutes later. He said that the front door was locked. Flores offered to open the back door, and the man accepted. She climbed through a window and opened the door. The man thanked Flores, gave her a cigarette and some methamphetamine, and then walked down the hallway.