People v. Rivas CA5
Filed 7/26/16 P. v. Rivas 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F071267 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. VCF293262) v.
RENE A. RIVAS, ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING REHEARING Defendant and Appellant. [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT]
THE COURT: It is ordered that the nonpublished opinion filed herein on July 11, 2016, be modified as follows:
1. On page 2, the following is removed from the end of the first sentence of paragraph one “and failed to object to hearsay testimony” so the sentence now reads:
Appellant Rene A. Rivas contends his defense attorney rendered ineffective assistance of counsel because the attorney had a conflict of interest.
2. On page 4, in the fifth paragraph, a comma is added after the phrase “A few months later” in the fourth sentence.
3. On page 4, in the fifth paragraph, the fifth and sixth sentences beginning “When the question” and “The objection” are deleted.
4. On page 4, in the fifth paragraph, the word “then” is deleted from the seventh sentence.
5. On page 5, the first paragraph under the heading Discussion is revised in its entirety and now reads:
Rivas contends the public defender’s office rendered ineffective assistance of counsel because it had a conflict of interest.
6. On page 5, the second paragraph under the heading Discussion is deleted in its entirety.
7. On page 5, the word “will” is deleted from the third paragraph under the heading Discussion so the sentence now reads:
We address, and reject, Rivas’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel on the basis of a conflict of interest.
8. On page 6, the third full paragraph is deleted in its entirety.
9. On page 6, the first sentence of the fourth full paragraph is revised by deleting “regardless of any statements made by the sister” so the sentence now reads:
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)