People v. Vaaitautia CA2/8
Filed 10/21/20 P. v. Vaaitautia CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B296143
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA109908) v.
EPI PALKI VAAITAUTIA,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jesse I. Rodriguez and Laura L. Laesecke, Judges. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions. Stanley Dale Radtke, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr., Supervising
Deputy Attorney General, and Stacy S. Schwartz, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________ A jury found Epi Palki Vaaitautia guilty of selling methamphetamine and of possessing the drug for sale. Vaaitautia challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion for discovery under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). He also attacks his two Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b) prior prison term enhancements due to Senate Bill No. 136 (2019–2020 Reg. Sess.) (SB 136). We agree with Vaaitautia as to both issues. We conditionally reverse the judgment and order the enhancements stricken. Undesignated statutory citations are to the Penal Code. I On August 5, 2018, the Long Beach Police Department worked a drug operation with a confidential informant, James Beasley. Narcotics detective Scott Destefano said he gave the informant $20 bills Destefano had photocopied to identify the serial numbers. Based on the informant’s trial testimony, one Detective Thue was also present for the operation. The informant approached Vaaitautia in a park. According to the informant, Vaaitautia exchanged a “pretty nice size” portion of methamphetamine for $20. The informant wore a camera. A video captured audio of their conversation but not the visual exchange of drugs and money. After the buy, the informant met Destefano and one Detective Camrin and gave them the drug. Police partners George Evans and Arthur Vega searched Vaaitautia. Vega said he found a $20 bill in Vaaitautia’s left pants’ pocket, $101 in his wallet, and $605 in another pocket.
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)