People v. Metias CA5

Filed 6/4/24 P. v. Metias 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F086554 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 21CR-01753) v.

RAMY ROUSHDY TAWFIK METIAS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County. Stephanie L. Jamieson, Judge. Cynthia L. Barnes, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

-ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P. J., Detjen, J. and Smith, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellate counsel for appellant Ramy Roushdy Tawfik Metias filed an opening brief summarizing the pertinent facts and raising no issues but asking this court to review the record independently. (See People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) The opening brief includes a declaration from appellate counsel stating that Metias was advised of his right to file a brief of his own with this court. By letter dated March 12, 2024, we also invited Metias to submit additional briefing. To date, we have not received a response from him. Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, we have reviewed the entire record. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to Metias, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY On February 24, 2023, the Merced County District Attorney filed a first amended information charging Metias with rape of an intoxicated person (Pen. Code,1 § 261, subd. (a)(3), count 1); sexual battery by restraint (§ 243.4, subd. (a), count 2); assault with the intent to commit rape (§ 220, subd. (a)(1), count 3); and attempting to destroy or conceal evidence, a misdemeanor (§§ 664/135, count 4). On June 13, 2023, the trial court granted the prosecutor’s motion to dismiss count 1.2 On June 14, 2023, the jury was sworn in. On June 22, 2023, the jury began deliberations.

1 All further undefined statutory citations are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. 2 Although count 1 was dismissed, throughout the remainder of the proceedings, the parties and the verdict forms referred to the remaining charges as counts 1 through 3. We refer to the charges by their original designation in the amended information for the sake of consistency.