People v. Hines CA5

Filed 6/10/21 P. v. Hines 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F080780 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Fresno Super. Ct. No. F15904809) v.

ROSHAUN DONTES HINES, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Don Penner, Jonathan M. Skiles, Jonathan B. Conklin, and Kristi Culver Kapetan, Judges.† Gordon B. Scott, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P.J., Levy, J. and Detjen, J. † Judge Penner presided over the Penal Code section 1368 proceedings; Judge Skiles presided over the Penal Code section 1370 proceedings; Judge Conklin presided over the Penal Code section 1372 proceedings; and Judge Kapetan presided over the jury trial, motion to withdraw plea and sentencing hearings.

INTRODUCTION Appellant and defendant Roshaun Dontes Hines pleaded no contest to first degree burglary and was sentenced to the indicated term of four years in prison. On appeal, his appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We affirm. FACTS1 At approximately 3:58 a.m. on August 3, 2015, officers from the Fresno Police Department responded to a residence on a dispatch about a burglary in process. They met with G.A., who said he was visiting his friend, C.C., at the house, and they had been asleep. G.A. said he woke up because he heard a loud bang coming from the garage and realized someone was trying to get into the house through the door leading from the garage to the house. G.A. said he got out of bed and woke up C.C. C.C. told G.A. to call 911 and look outside, while C.C. got dressed and loaded his rifle. G.A. called 911 and looked through the kitchen window. He saw a man, later identified as defendant, crawl out of a broken garage window. Defendant turned toward the house, and G.A. saw his face. Defendant fled the area. The officers found pry marks on the frame of the door leading from the garage to the house, and a shovel with wood and paint on it. The officers located defendant in an area three houses away. After being advised of the warnings pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436, defendant admitted he climbed over a wall to get onto C.C.’s property and entered the garage through an open door. He used the shovel to try to open the door from the garage into the house but