People v. Speights CA2/5

Filed 12/9/22 P. v. Speights CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has California not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B317550

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA156521) v.

QUANISHA SPEIGHTS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Lee W. Tsao, Judge. Affirmed.

Katja Grosch, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________________

INTRODUCTION Defendant Quanisha Speights appeals from her conviction for assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)).1 Appointed counsel on appeal filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. The Assault On August 8, 2021, the victim was walking alone through a park in Los Angeles for exercise. Defendant, who was sitting nearby, attacked the victim. Defendant threw a glass bottle at the victim’s face, giving him a black eye. Defendant struck the victim with a plastic comb, scratching his back. When the victim fell to the ground, defendant kicked him in the head two or three times. 2. Information On October 7, 2021, the People filed an information alleging that defendant committed felony assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) and various enhancements. On December 17, 2021, the People amended the information to allege a second count for assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)). 3. Marsden Hearing and Trial At a December 16, 2021 hearing, defendant indicated she wanted to proceed to trial immediately. After an exchange that lasted several minutes, the court advised the defendant of her constitutional rights, defendant waived those rights (except the right to testify), and the court took a modified “slow plea.” (See