People v. Moore CA2/8
Filed 10/22/21 P. v. Moore CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B306541
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA074720) v.
KYLE MOORE,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Charles Chung, Judge. Affirmed.
Jason M. Howell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________
Conforming to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), Kyle Moore’s counsel filed an opening brief containing a statement of facts but raising no issues. At our request, counsel augmented the record. Counsel then filed a second Wende brief asking this court to review the record independently and to determine whether any arguable issues exist on appeal. Moore submitted two supplemental briefs, one in connection with each of counsel’s Wende briefs. We have reviewed the supplemental briefs and the entire record, including the augmented material. No arguable issues exist. We affirm. Statutory citations are to the Penal Code. I We recount the pertinent factual and procedural background. An amended information charged Moore with three counts of second degree robbery and three counts of assault with a firearm. Court-appointed counsel represented Moore. On August 21, 2019, the trial court held a Marsden hearing. (People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 (Marsden).) The judge found Moore’s lawyer to be “an excellent lawyer” who “really has been working very diligently” on Moore’s case. Two of the charged robberies took place on September 20, 2015, at a Pizza Hut and a Chevron a few miles away. Each victim, a shift manager at the Pizza Hut and a cashier at the Chevron, testified at trial. Each testified a masked man pointed a gun at them and demanded money. Each testified they were scared. The Pizza Hut shift manager described the man as wearing a white hoodie, jeans, and a mask, a description that matched both surveillance video of a man running past the store
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)