People v. Sanchez CA2/2

Filed 6/7/16 P. v. Sanchez CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B263066

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GA088090) v.

CECILY RENEE SANCHEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Cathryn F. Brougham, Judge. Reversed.

Roberta Simon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Mary Sanchez and Robert M. Snider, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________

Appellant Cecily Renee Sanchez was charged with three felonies: assault with a deadly weapon, an automobile (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)) (count 1); assault upon a peace officer with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (c)) (count 2); and evading an officer with willful and wanton disregard (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) (count 3). The jury deadlocked on counts 1 and 2, and the trial court declared a mistrial on those counts, which were later dismissed after the prosecution indicated it was unable to proceed on them. The jury found appellant guilty on count 3, which the court later reduced to a misdemeanor over the prosecutor’s objection. Appellant was placed on summary probation for three years on condition that she serve 180 days in jail. Appellant contends there was insufficient evidence to support the jury’s verdict on count 3 and asks us to conduct an independent review under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). We find no Pitchess error. However, we find that the prosecution did not prove all of the elements of count 3 because there was no evidence that the pursuing officer’s motor vehicle was exhibiting a lighted red lamp visible from the front. We therefore reverse the judgment on count 3. FACTS Prosecution Case On October 6, 2012, shortly after 7:00 p.m., the Monterey Park Police Department began receiving calls about a fight with shots fired and a man down at the Shakey’s Pizza Parlor on Atlantic Boulevard. Officers Jeffrey Sanchez, Timothy Wisniewski, and Rudy Contreras responded to the scene. The parking lot was chaotic, with people running and screaming. Officer Sanchez saw four Hispanic men fighting in the parking lot. When he approached and ordered them to lie on the ground, two of the men ignored him and started walking away. Seconds later, appellant, who was driving a black Honda Civic, stopped the car between Officer Sanchez and the two men. One of the men, who was appellant’s boyfriend, got into the Honda’s rear seat. Officer Sanchez yelled “stop” at the car half a dozen times. But appellant drove quickly through the parking lot. Officer Sanchez lost sight of the car.