People v. Marquez CA5

Filed 3/20/23 P. v. Marquez CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F083366 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. DF013517A) v.

FELIX MARQUEZ, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT * APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. David Wolf and Charles R. Brehmer, Judges.ǂ Julia J. Spikes, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Julie A. Hokans and Jessica C. Leal, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and Snauffer, J. ǂ Judge Wolf ruled on the discovery issue; Judge Brehmer pronounced judgment.

Defendant Felix Marquez appeals a judgment of conviction following a plea. He requests that this court independently review the prosecution’s assertion of an evidentiary privilege relating to discovery withheld from the defense. We find no error in this regard and affirm the judgment. However, we order the abstract of judgment be amended to correct an error. FACTS We draw the facts below from the preliminary hearing transcript. Around 10:00 a.m. one October morning, a correctional officer at Kern Valley State Prison saw inmate Michael Santos striking another inmate, X, who was pinned up against a wall.1 Marquez joined in at about one minute into the attack. Santos and Marquez were described as using stabbing motions. X was not fighting back and eventually slumped down against the wall. He was stabbed many times in his head and torso, suffering a collapsed lung, among other injuries. He was transported to a hospital for medical attention. Fortunately, X survived this brutal attack. A district attorney’s office investigator interviewed X eleven months after the attack. X claimed to be a validated member of the Mexican Mafia who was trying to drop out of the gang so that he could be placed on a “sensitive needs yard.” X was seeking to debrief,2 and to that end he had provided information to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, but officials could not corroborate any of the information he had provided.