P v. Mejia CA5

Filed 6/22/22 P v. Mejia 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F082348 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 20CMS-2098) v.

VINCENTE ROBERTO MEJIA, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Robert S. Burns, Judge. Daniel G. Koryn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez and Amanda D. Cary, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Poochigian, Acting P. J., Snauffer, J. and DeSantos, J.

INTRODUCTION Vicente Roberto Mejia (“Defendant”) groped another person at a casino in Kings County. When questioned after the incident, defendant provided a false name and identification to law enforcement. An information charged defendant with (among other conduct) misdemeanor sexual battery (Pen. Code,1 § 243.4, subd. (e)(1); count 3) and misdemeanor assault and battery (§ 242; count 5).2 After a bench trial, the court found defendant guilty of both charges. On appeal, defendant claims section 954 requires reversal of his conviction for simple battery. The People agree defendant is entitled to this relief. Defendant also asks us to correct the minute order to reflect he did not commit battery by the use of force or violence. The People do not agree with defendant on this point. We reverse defendant’s conviction for battery because it is a lesser included offense of sexual battery. We otherwise affirm the judgment.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND3 THE INCIDENT IN QUESTION On September 24, 2019, T.G. watched her friend play a game at a casino. Defendant sat down next to T.G. and asked her if she had won and T.G. responded she had not. Defendant grabbed T.G.’s buttocks and “pulled up on it” two or three times. T.G. asked defendant why he touched her and defendant responded, “ ‘It’s not like you didn’t like it.’ ” T.G. asked casino security for help and defendant walked outside.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 The other charges included felony false impersonation (§ 529, subd. (a)(3)), felony identity theft (§ 530.5, subd. (a)), and misdemeanor giving false information to a police officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a)). 3 We only recite the facts necessary for resolution of this appeal.