People v. Smith CA1/5

Filed 10/29/20 P. v. Smith CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A156741 v. RAYVAUGHN LEWIS (San Francisco County SMITH, Super. Ct. No. SCN229129) Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant Rayvaughn Lewis Smith (Appellant) appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction of assault with intent to commit a felony and other offenses. He contends the trial court erred in excluding evidence proffered to impeach the victim’s credibility. The court did not abuse its discretion. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In May 2018, the San Francisco County District Attorney charged Appellant by information with assault with intent to commit a felony against a person under the age of 18 (Pen. Code, § 220, subd. (a)(2); count one);1 child endangerment (§ 273a, subd. (a); count two); false imprisonment (§ 236; count

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

three); and giving false information to a police officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a); count four). A jury found Appellant guilty as charged. In March 2019, the trial court sentenced Appellant to a prison term of five years on count one, stayed the sentences on counts two and three pursuant to section 654, and imposed a jail term on count four with credit for time served equal to the length of the term. FACTUAL BACKGROUND According to the testimony at trial,2 the charges arose out of an April 22, 2018 incident at a San Francisco parking structure. The victim, 16-year- old S.G., testified she and two female friends met up with Appellant at the parking structure. They drank and smoked marijuana until the victim’s friends left. She stayed behind to finish the marijuana cigarette she was smoking. Afterwards, as S.G. and Appellant walked toward the exit, he pulled her into a corner. He started pulling down her pants and exposed his penis. S.G. said, “We not fittin to do all that” and pulled up her pants; Appellant punched her in the face. She continued to try to pull her pants up, and he punched her several more times. They continued to struggle, while Appellant insisted they have sex and tried to remove her pants. A building concierge monitoring a surveillance camera testified she saw a couple struggling in the garage. She approached the area and heard a female voice saying “stop,” and then called the police. A police officer testified he heard a man and woman screaming or arguing when he arrived on the scene. Appellant falsely identified himself and said S.G. was drunk and he was trying to take her home. S.G., whose face was red and swollen on