People v. Paopao CA2/8

File 10/20/15 P. v. Paopao CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B262254

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA100450) v.

MATTHEW F. PAOPAO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Tomson T. Ong, Judge. Affirmed.

Christopher Love, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No response by Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________________

Defendant was initially charged by felony complaint with attempted carjacking. (Pen. Code, §§ 664/215, subd. (a).) After a preliminary hearing, he was charged by information with attempted carjacking, attempted robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 664/211), and criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422, subd. (a)). It was also alleged that defendant suffered a prior conviction of robbery – as a strike (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(j)), a five-year prior (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)), and a prior prison term (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Before trial, defendant filed a Marsden motion to replace his appointed counsel, on the basis that his attorney was not conducting an adequate investigation. (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.) The motion was denied. The trial on the prior conviction allegations was bifurcated. At trial, the prosecution’s evidence revealed the following facts. On October 4, 2014, at 10:00 p.m., defendant – who was shirtless – approached the victim Javier Vasquez in the driveway to the latter’s apartment. Vasquez was leaning on his car; the garage was open and there was a bicycle within. Defendant spoke to Vasquez in English; Vasquez is a Spanish-speaker but speaks some English. Defendant said to Vasquez, “ ‘Motherfucker, you have everything, you have it.’ “ Defendant raised his fists in a fighting stance and demanded the bicycle from Vasquez. Vasquez said it didn’t work. Defendant then said, “ ’Give me the keys to your car.’ ” Defendant made Vasquez empty his pockets; Vasquez did, but hid the car key. Defendant then started hitting and kicking Vasquez. Vasquez picked up a pipe in the garage with which to defend himself. Defendant displayed his tattoos and told Vasquez he was in a gang. He said, “ ’I’m going to come and kill you.’ ” Vasquez was not alone during the encounter; his brother-in-law, Luis, was there. Vasquez and Luis together scared defendant away. Luis did not testify at trial, nor did he give a statement to police. Although Vasquez did not know it at the time, his neighbor, Lanisha Weekes, saw the encounter from her window and called 911. At trial, she confirmed that defendant demanded Vasquez’s car and threatened to “ ’jack’ ” it. She also confirmed that defendant said he was from a gang and threatened to come back with his “ ’homies.’ ”