People v. Vargas CA2/8
Filed 10/19/20 P. v. Vargas CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B301513
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA471048) v.
CARLOS JUAQUIN SANCHEZ VARGAS,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Frederick N. Wapner, Judge. Affirmed. Benjamin Owens, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Acting Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General, Roberta L. Davis and William H. Shin, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. **********
Defendant and appellant Carlos Juaquin Sanchez Vargas was convicted of multiple sexual offenses with a child under 10 years of age and sentenced to prison for a term of 15 years to life, plus 12 years. Defendant contends his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move for the suppression of his pretrial statement to law enforcement. He further argues the trial court misunderstood its sentencing discretion and that a new sentencing hearing is warranted. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant was charged with two counts of sexual penetration with a child 10 years old or younger (Pen. Code, § 288.7, subd. (b); counts 1 & 2) and three counts of committing a lewd act upon a child (§ 288, subd. (a); counts 3, 4 & 5). Defendant’s victim, S.S., testified at trial that he assaulted her numerous times at her family’s church. Over a period of months (S.S. was eight and nine years old at the time), S.S. would see defendant on the church grounds. She and her family were at the church three to four days each week. Oftentimes, defendant would approach her when she was outside and away from other children or adults. Other times, he would sit down next to her while they were in the church or the cafeteria. Defendant first touched her private parts over her clothes, but the next time he pushed his hand under her clothes. Defendant grabbed her hand so she could not run away from him. She would tell him to stop but he did not listen to her. S.S. did not tell anyone what was happening because defendant told her “he was gonna do something that was bad to [her].” Defendant also touched her buttocks and her chest, both over and under her
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)