People v. Vincent CA2/4

Filed 8/25/15 P. v. Vincent CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B260027

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA100638) v.

DONALD JAMES VINCENT,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mike Camacho, Jr., Judge. Affirmed. The Rodriguez Law Group, Ambrosio E. Rodriguez, and Greg Balderrama for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Michael R. Johnsen and Steven E. Mercer, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

________________________________

INTRODUCTION Donald James Vincent was convicted of multiple felony counts of sexual abuse and molestation of two minors. He appeals, contending that a juror committed misconduct. Appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying his postverdict petition to unseal the juror’s records under Code of Civil Procedure section 237, and in denying his motion for a new trial under Penal Code section 1 1181. He also raises related claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. For the reasons stated below, we conclude that appellant failed to demonstrate prejudice from any juror misconduct or from trial counsel’s performance. Accordingly, we affirm. 2 FACTUAL BACKGROUND AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY A. Jury Trial and Verdicts In a consolidated information, appellant was charged with committing numerous sex acts on two minors over a period of several years. Appellant pleaded not guilty on all counts, and a jury trial commenced January 22, 2014. Toward the end of the prosecution’s case-in-chief, the prosecution called the mother of one of the victims as a witness. As the mother recounted what her daughter had told her about the sexual abuse, Juror No. 5 abruptly stood up, said “Excuse me, Your Honor,” and left the courtroom. The court excused the remaining jurors for lunch. After the lunch break, outside the presence of the other jurors, the court questioned Juror No. 5 about his actions. Asked whether his unexpected departure from the courtroom was based on the impact of the witness testimony, Juror No. 5