P. v. Perry CA2/6

Filed 3/6/13 P. v. Perry CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B241663 (Super. Ct. No. 2009025996) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v.

STEVEN PAUL PERRY,

Defendant and Appellant.

Steven Paul Perry appeals a judgment following his conviction of three counts of indecent exposure, with findings of prior indecent exposure convictions and service of four prior prison terms. (Pen. Code, §§ 314, subd. 1, 667.5, subd. (b).)1 We appointed counsel to represent Perry in this appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) We advised Perry that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. On January 16, 2013, we received a response from him contending that the trial court erred by: 1) denying his motion to dismiss the prosecution for lack of a speedy trial, and 2) permitting evidence of his six prior convictions for indecent exposure. Pursuant to People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 123-124, we present a factual and procedural summary of the case and a brief discussion of Perry's contentions.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless stated otherwise.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On July 29, 2009, the Ventura County prosecutor charged Perry by felony complaint with three counts of indecent exposure with prior indecent exposure convictions. (§ 314, subd. 1.) The three counts concerned incidents occurring in May and June 2009 at a Ventura college and a Camarillo library. On June 16, 2009, Perry was arrested in Los Angeles County for an act of indecent exposure committed at the University of California. On July 23, 2009, he was convicted of indecent exposure and sentenced to three years imprisonment. (§ 314, subd. 1.) Prior to Perry's imprisonment, his parole officer notified Ventura County law enforcement that Perry was in custody. Ventura police officers then traveled to Los Angeles and met with Perry, who invoked his rights pursuant to Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436. Subsequently a warrant issued for Perry's arrest, but he was not prosecuted in Ventura County until his release from prison in January 2012. On February 17, 2012, the Ventura County prosecutor filed an information charging Perry with three counts of indecent exposure. The information also alleged that Perry suffered prior indecent exposure convictions and served four prior prison terms. On April 18, 2012, Perry filed a motion to dismiss the prosecution for lack of speedy prosecution. He argued that he suffered prejudice from the delay because he lost the opportunity for sentencing consecutive to the Los Angeles County conviction. The trial court relied upon People v. Lowe (2007) 40 Cal.4th 937, 945-946, and denied the motion. At trial, the victims in each of the charged counts testified that Perry sat near them in the college or public library and began masturbating. Later, they identified Perry in photographic lineups. The public library security videotape also reflected Perry entering the library and walking near the area where the victims were sitting. The jury convicted Perry of the charged counts. In a separate proceeding, he admitted serving four prior prison terms within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). The trial court sentenced Perry to a two-year midterm for count 1, eight months consecutive for count 2, and eight months consecutive for count 3, plus four years