People v. Arango CA2/6
Filed 3/28/22 P. v. Arango CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX
THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B307409 (Super. Ct. No. 18CR02827) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County)
v.
ADRIAN ARTURO ARANGO, JR.,
Defendant and Appellant.
Adrian Arturo Arango, Jr. (Arango) appeals a judgment entered following conviction of second degree robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, making criminal threats (two counts), brandishing a deadly weapon, resisting a police officer, shoplifting, and hit-and-run driving. (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 245, subd. (a)(1), 422, subd. (a), 417, subd. (a)(1), 148, subd. (a)(1), 459.5, subd. (a)1; Veh. Code, § 20002, subd. (a).) The trial court found that Arango personally used a deadly weapon during
All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless 1
stated otherwise.
commission of the robbery, suffered a prior serious felony and strike conviction, and served a prior prison term. (§§ 12022, subd. (b), 667, subd. (a), 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667.5, subd. (b).) We strike the stayed one-year prior prison term enhancement but otherwise affirm. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).) This appeal concerns crimes including robbery, assault with a deadly weapon, and making criminal threats that Arango committed during three unrelated incidents during two days. Following a court trial, the court convicted Arango of nearly all charges and found the allegations true. On appeal, Arango raises claims of mental incompetency, sufficiency of evidence regarding the criminal threats, and sentencing errors. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Criminal Threats and Weapon Brandishing Against S.G. (Counts 5 & 6) In the late afternoon of March 24, 2018, S.G., a custodian at Stearns Wharf, noticed Arango sitting inside a vehicle that was parked in a red zone on the wharf. Arango opened the vehicle door, and said, “What are you going to do, you son of a bitch?” S.G. informed Arango that he was a city employee and that Arango’s vehicle impeded traffic. Arango had a tattoo on his head and S.G. thought he was “a gangster.” S.G. informed Arango that he was contacting harbor patrol. Arango responded: “You’re not going to do that to me, you son of a bitch.” S.G. had difficulty with his radio reception and decided to telephone the police emergency dispatcher. Arango held a screwdriver, approached S.G., and stated that he was going to kill him. S.G. ran away and Arango followed until Arango realized S.G. was speaking to the police dispatcher. Arango then returned to his vehicle and drove away.
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)