People v. Torres CA1/4

Filed 9/28/22 P. v. Torres CA1/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A162882 v. (San Mateo County Super. Ct. WILLIAM ROBERTO TORRES, No. 19SF014526A) Defendant and Appellant.

William Roberto Torres appeals from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial and bifurcated bench trial. He was found guilty as charged of felony possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) and misdemeanor possession of drug paraphernalia (id., § 11364), and the court found he had two prior convictions, including a serious felony strike under Penal Code sections 667, subdivisions (b) to (j), and 1170.12, subdivision (b). Torres’s appointed appellate counsel has submitted a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, requesting that we independently review the record. Counsel has advised Torres of his right to submit a supplemental brief, which Torres has not done. Our independent review of the record has revealed no issues that warrant further briefing.

1

I. BACKGROUND In December 2019, the San Mateo County District Attorney filed an information charging Torres with the above-listed offenses. A preliminary hearing followed. Torres later moved under Penal Code section 995 to set aside the possession for sale count, arguing the prosecution did not present evidence at the hearing that Torres intended to sell methamphetamine as charged. The court denied the motion. Prior to trial, Torres moved under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118 for the appointment of new counsel for multiple reasons. His attorney said he could continue to represent Torres. The court found there were not “any real major conflicts” and denied the motion. During voir dire, the prosecution used a peremptory challenge to dismiss a particular juror who indicated he did not think drug offenses should be criminalized. Torres’s counsel subsequently challenged the dismissal, arguing there was no cause because the juror had also indicated he could follow the court’s instructions regardless of his personal feelings. The court rejected the challenge. At an April 2021 trial, the prosecution presented evidence that at 2:15 a.m. on April 9, 2019, a Belmont, California police sergeant came upon Torres sitting in a car parked in front of a residence under construction in an area where several burglaries of homes under construction had occurred. The officer noticed numerous items in the back seat of the car. He stopped and questioned Torres, who said he was visiting a friend, Aundrea. The officer knew an Aundrea lived across the street, and he had taken previous case reports regarding her. Torres denied having any contraband, but he also looked left and moved his left hand closer to his thigh area.