P. v. Rodriguez CA2/8

Filed 5/1/13 P. v. Rodriguez CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B242907

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA 119325) v.

PEDRO QUINONES RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Thomas McKnew, Judge. Affirmed.

Vanessa Place, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

******

Pedro Quinones Rodriguez appeals from a judgment of conviction after a jury found him guilty of sex/sodomy with a child under 10, sexual penetration of a child under 10, and lewd act upon a child under 10. Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), appellant’s counsel filed an opening brief requesting that this court review the record and determine whether any arguable issues exist on appeal. We have reviewed the entire record and find no arguable issue. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND As required by People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 124, we provide a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. Appellant and his wife used to babysit the victim, G.M. G.M. was 11 years old at the time of trial when she testified. She was in special education classes. When she was in third grade, appellant penetrated her anus with his penis. He did this to her more than two times. On another occasion, appellant used his finger to penetrate her vagina. He also penetrated her vagina with his penis “a lot” of times. These things would happen in the bathroom at appellant’s house. Appellant and his wife also used to babysit N. at their house. N. was eight years old. Appellant’s wife is N.’s grandmother. Appellant “bad touch[ed]” N. more than once. This happened at appellant’s house. He came into the bathroom when she was showering and touched her “private parts.” Detective Maricruz Perez of the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department interviewed appellant. He told Detective Perez that he had penetrated G.M.’s vagina with his penis one time. He also said he touched her vagina one time with his hand, and penetrated her vagina with his finger one time. He said he had “massaged” her anus one time with his penis and put Vaseline on the area. He told the detective this all happened on two days in the bathroom of his house. An amended information charged appellant with three counts of sex/sodomy with a child under the age of 10, one count of oral copulation/sexual penetration with a child under the age of 10, and seven counts of lewd acts upon a child. All three counts of sex/sodomy with a child, the single count of oral copulation/sexual penetration, and five counts of lewd