People v. Richard CA5
Filed 6/5/15 P. v. Richard 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F068450 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Tuolumne Super. Ct. v. No. CRF41617)
ERNEST WILLIAM RICHARD III, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. Eric L. DuTemple, Judge. Paul Stubb, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Poochigian, Acting P.J., Peña, J. and Smith, J.
INTRODUCTION Appellant/defendant Ernest William Richard III pleaded guilty to second degree burglary with a prior strike conviction and was sentenced to 32 months. On appeal, his appellate counsel filed a brief that summarizes the facts with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) By letter on April 24, 2014, we invited defendant to submit additional briefing. Defendant has filed a letter brief and claims he was innocent of the charge. We affirm. FACTS1 On July 6, 2013, defendant and Brook Walsh entered the Save Mart grocery store in Sonora. They selected several items, placed them in the cart, and rolled the cart out of the store without paying. Defendant returned to the store, grabbed several grocery bags, and walked out. Defendant and Walsh placed the stolen goods into the grocery bags, put the bags in the cart, and walked down the street. Officer Khalil and Sergeant Vanderwiel responded to the scene. Officer Khalil asked Walsh why she stole from Save Mart. Walsh pointed to a large bag of dog food and a 12-pack of orange soda, and said she stole those items but paid for everything else. Officer Khalil could smell the odor of an alcoholic beverage from Walsh’s breath, and he noticed her eyes were red and watery. Sergeant Vanderwiel spoke to defendant, who denied any involvement in any crime. Defendant was carrying a backpack that contained several food items in new condition, including iced coffee drinks that were still cold to the touch. Once all the items were removed from the backpack, there was no personal property remaining, which indicated defendant brought an empty backpack to the store.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)