P. v. Wiley CA2/4

Filed 5/24/13 P. v. Wiley CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B233989

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA110193) v.

AARON G. WILEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Philip H. Hickok, Judge. Affirmed. Tara K. Hoveland, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Linda C. Johnson and Carl N. Henry, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Aaron G. Wiley challenges the sufficiency of the evidence identifying him as the perpetrator of an assault with a deadly weapon against victim Carlos O.1 We conclude there is substantial evidence to support the jury verdict and affirm the judgment of conviction.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY At 9:00 p.m. on the night of February 13, 2009, Carlos O. was standing on the sidewalk near his home talking with his girlfriend, Myra Stephanie Hernandez. A light- colored, older, two-door Cadillac drove up. A passenger got out of the car and started shooting at him. He fired six or seven times. Carlos O. ran, fell, and was shot in the foot. He was hospitalized overnight, and was required to wear a cast for three or four weeks. He had a bullet fragment in his foot and a scar. In an amended information, appellant was charged with assault with a firearm in violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(2). It was alleged that he personally used a firearm in connection with the assault on Carlos O. The jury deadlocked on the assault against Carlos, and the court declared a mistrial as to that count. It was retried. The jury convicted appellant and found true the allegation that he personally used a handgun in the commission of the crime. The jury found not true the allegation that appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury. Appellant was sentenced to a term of seven years for the assault on Carlos O. (three-year middle term plus four years on the gun use enhancement). Appellant filed a timely appeal.