People v. Shivalila CA1/2

Filed 9/14/22 P. v. Shivalila CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A164966 v. ITURI SHIVALILA, (Mendocino County Super. Ct. No. 21CR01660) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Ituri Shivalila appeals from a judgment entered after he pled no contest to assault likely to cause great bodily injury and admitted the allegation of great bodily injury. Defendant’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief asking this court for an independent review of the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Defendant was informed of his right to file supplemental briefing and has not filed such a brief. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and independently reviewed the record, and we find no errors or other issues requiring further briefing. Accordingly, we affirm. On September 9, 2021, defendant was charged by information with assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4); count 1),1 and first degree burglary (§ 459; count 2). As to the

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless 1

otherwise stated.

1

assault count, the information alleged the special allegation that defendant inflicted great bodily injury upon a person not an accomplice to the offense (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)), and as to the burglary count, that another person was present during the burglary, making it a violent felony within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (c)(21). As part of a negotiated disposition, on January 21, 2022, defendant pled no contest to the assault likely to cause great bodily injury count and the special allegation (count 1), with an indicated sentence of probation with no more than one year in county jail. In exchange, the district attorney dismissed the remainder of the information pursuant to plea, as well as two other cases against defendant.2 According to the preliminary hearing transcript, the incident giving rise to the current charges began early in the morning on August 16, 2021, in Willits. Officer Natalie Higley of the Willits Police Department responded to a trailer park at about 6:20 a.m. that day, where she spoke to Mr. Kester, who lived in trailer 7. Kester told her he saw light outside his trailer and heard an unusual rustling and banging noise coming from inside trailer 6, the trailer next door to his. Kester went to trailer 6 and saw a person wearing a dark hat and clothing leave the trailer. Kester had seen this person around the trailer park the day before. ~(7 RT 69)~ Kester then saw Mr. Boles, who lived in trailer 6, and called 911. ~(RT 69)~