People v. Verdugo CA2/5

Filed 10/9/20 P. v. Verdugo CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B301254

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA456152) v.

DAVID VERDUGO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Laura Priver, Judge. Affirmed.

Brian C. McComas, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________________

INTRODUCTION Defendant David Verdugo appeals his conviction for arson of an inhabited structure following a jury trial. Appointed counsel on appeal filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On November 8, 2016, the Los Angeles County Fire Department responded to a fire at defendant’s apartment. Neighbors did not see or hear anything unusual before the fire. The fire was put out in five minutes and fire fighters were at the scene for less than two hours. Defendant was found outside the apartment injured from having jumped through his first-floor bedroom window to escape (the window was elevated above ground level). He mentioned something about being doused in gasoline by unknown assailants. His forehead was scraped but his clothes and hair were not burned or singed. Inside the apartment, there were no signs of an electrical fire or use of an accelerant. Burned paper appeared to be the source of the heavy charring in the closet. A broken window had channeled out the smoke. The firefighters were suspicious of the fire and called an arson investigator. The arson investigator identified four points of possible origin. A fire was started separately at each location by an open flame. The first point was a flame-retardant blanket hanging in a window that had burned itself out. The second was a hotplate that had burned some materials placed on the heated grill. The third was the foot of a love seat that did not continue to burn. Finally, the bedroom closet was the fourth point and was most affected by fire. The arson investigator spoke with defendant at the hospital. Defendant told the investigator that he was alone in his apartment, when two men broke inside, bound him, and