People v. Baker CA5

Filed 11/8/21 P. v. Baker 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F080577 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF54587) v.

MICHAEL LOGAN BAKER, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. Kevin M. Seibert, Judge. McCallister & McCallister and Kirk W. McAllister for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez and Jennifer Oleksa, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- Michael Logan Baker was involved in a fistfight. He was subsequently charged with two crimes. The matter proceeded to jury trial during which the jury informed the court it had reached a not guilty verdict on one charge but was unsure if it should deliberate on the second charge.

As discussed in greater detail below, the court ordered the jury to deliberate on the second charge. The jury then returned a guilty verdict on the second charge. Baker now challenges the legal validity of the verdict and contends he is entitled to an acquittal. We find no error and affirm. BACKGROUND Charges The Tuolumne County District Attorney charged Baker with two crimes: Felony assault (Pen. Code, 1 § 245, subd. (a)(1); Count 1) and felony battery (§ 243, subd. (d); Count 2). The first count included an enhancement for causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). Trial Evidence The facts are largely irrelevant to the issues. Suffice it to say, Baker was involved in a physical altercation in which he inflicted multiple injuries to another man’s head. Verdict Baker was found not guilty of Count 1, guilty of the lesser included offense of assault (§ 240), and guilty of Count 2. He was sentenced to serve 10 months in jail and admitted to probation with various terms and conditions. DISCUSSION Baker contends “the verdict should have been recorded” when “[t]he jury informed the court that it found [him] not guilty of [Count 1] and indicated a decision of guilt on the lesser charge of simple assault.” According to him, “[t]he only possible disposition of Count 2 at that point was an acquittal.” He primarily bases his argument on section 1162, which states, in part, “the court must give judgment of acquittal” where “it can be clearly understood” the jury intends “to find in favor of the defendant ….”