People v. Aparicio CA4/3

Filed 3/30/16 P. v. Aparicio CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G052387

v. (Super. Ct. No. 14NF1885)

ARTURO ORTEGA APARICIO, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Michael J. Cassidy, Judge. Affirmed. Arielle Bases, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

A jury convicted defendant Arturo Ortega Aparicio of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a), all further references are to this code). The court placed defendant on probation on various conditions, including 90 days in jail, and ordered defendant to stay away from the victim and his family. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed a brief summarizing the proceedings and facts of the case and advised the court she found no arguable issues to assert on defendant’s behalf. (Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) To assist us in our independent review of the record, counsel suggested we consider the issues discussed below. Defendant filed a supplemental brief on his own behalf, which we will also discuss below. FACTS We recite the facts in the light most favorable to the judgment, drawing all reasonable inferences in support thereof. (People v. Rodriguez (1999) 20 Cal.4th 1, 11; People v. Villasenor (2015) 242 Cal.App.4th 42, 47-48.) Defendant and the victim, Omar Castillo, live in adjacent apartment complexes. Their garages face one another and are separated by an alley. One day Castillo was walking towards his garage with his wife, 12-year-old son, and baby. Defendant was outside his garage with a friend. Defendant was sharpening a long knife and defendant and his friend were looking at Castillo in a threatening way (“mad-dogging”). Castillo walked towards defendant to ask if there was a problem. Defendant cursed Castillo and started swinging a hammer at him. Castillo backed away, but defendant pressed forward. Defendant swung the hammer at Castillo four or five times and hit him once. Castillo then punched defendant in the right eye. Defendant became upset and threw the hammer at Castillo. Castillo dodged the hammer.