People v. Casas CA2/2

Filed 6/23/21 P. v. Casas CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B301841

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GA049029) v.

EDGAR R. CASAS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael Villalobos, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of Michael Poole and Michael Poole for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Matthew Rodriquez, Acting Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr., and Steven D. Matthews, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

******

Edgar R. Casas (defendant) appeals from an order denying a Penal Code1 section 1473.7 motion to vacate his 2002 guilty plea to willful infliction of corporal injury to a spouse (§ 273.5, subd. (a)) and dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)). We affirm the trial court’s order.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND2 On March 2, 2002, Pam V., the mother of defendant’s two minor children, went to defendant’s home at his request. When Pam and the children arrived, defendant appeared to be under the influence of methamphetamine. Defendant left the home without explanation, and Pam and the children went to bed. Approximately 45 minutes later, defendant returned. An argument ensued that escalated into a physical altercation. Defendant grabbed Pam by the front of her shirt and punched her in the stomach three times. He then grabbed Pam’s hair and punched her in the face and on the right cheek. Defendant’s brother entered the room and separated defendant from Pam, who left with the children and called the police. Pam obtained an emergency protective order that evening. Defendant was arrested a few days later. Despite the protective order, defendant called Pam and urged her to lie to his probation officer about the assault. In multiple subsequent telephone calls, defendant told Pam that he did not want to go to jail and threatened her by stating, “Snitches end up in ditches,”