P. v. Robles CA1/2

Filed 6/10/13 P. v. Robles CA1/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, A137364 v. LUIS ANTONIO ROBLES (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC074081A) Defendants and Appellants.

Luis Antonio Robles appeals from a final judgment of conviction, based upon a plea of no contest, for the following violations against a minor under the age of 14 years: sodomy by means of force (Pen. Code, § 286, subd. (c)(2))1; sexual intercourse by means of force (§ 261, subd. (a)(2)); two counts of oral copulation by means of force (§ 288a, subd. (c)(2)); and residing with or having recurring access to a child under the age of 14 years, and engaging in acts of substantial sexual conduct or acts of lewd or lascivious conduct. (§ 288.5, subd. (a)). Appellant‟s counsel raises no issues, and requests an independent review of the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Ca1.3d 436. Appellant was advised by counsel of his right to file a supplemental brief but he has not done so. Based on our review of the record, we find no arguable issues and affirm the judgment.

1 All further unspecified code sections refer to the Penal Code.

1

BACKGROUND Officer Holowaty’s Report Deputy Probation Officer Janelle K. Holowaty prepared a report detailing the underlying offenses alleged to have been committed by appellant. Jane Doe, the victim in this matter, is the 14-year-old daughter of appellant. Doe revealed to a friend that she was raped by her father. Her friend relayed this information to a counselor who notified Child Protective Services. Doe‟s mother told police that she and appellant were legally separated and lived at separate residences, but appellant still visited their two children at her home. The police interviewed Doe, and she revealed that inappropriate sexual behavior occurred for two years when she was in the sixth and seventh grade. Doe stated that in the summer of 2010, appellant was supposed to drive her somewhere, but he took her home instead. When they arrived at home, Doe went into her bedroom and appellant followed her. She sat on her bed, and appellant forced her to take off her clothes. Appellant then took out his erect penis and inserted it into her vagina. When she resisted and told appellant she was afraid of becoming pregnant, appellant inserted his erect penis into her anus. She stated it hurt “really bad” and told appellant to stop. Appellant responded by asking what she preferred and then told her to “suck his penis.” Doe stated she complied because she was scared and that she was crying and shaking during the incident. Doe recalled another incident that took place in her bedroom where appellant attempted to insert his penis into her anus. During that incident, appellant covered her mouth with his hand as she laid on her stomach on the ground. Doe disclosed a similar incident where she was in the bathroom and appellant came in and forced her onto the ground. Appellant then laid on top of her and covered her mouth with his hand. Doe also disclosed that appellant orally copulated her and that he forced her to orally copulate him. She stated appellant would follow her to the bathroom and commit these acts. She recalled appellant inserted his fingers into her vagina while he orally copulated her. Doe stated this hurt and appellant only stopped to avoid detection by her mother. Doe further disclosed appellant forced her to massage his penis on a regular basis while her mother was taking baths or working late. She stated she would try to lock her