People v. Glass CA2/6

Filed 7/1/24 P. v. Glass CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B333211 (Super. Ct. No. MA074807) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

CORNELL GLASS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Cornell Glass appeals a judgment following his 2023 resentencing hearing on gang enhancement allegations required by Assembly Bill No. 333 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.). We appointed counsel to represent Glass on this appeal. After reviewing the record, counsel filed an opening brief relying on People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Glass filed a supplemental brief. We affirm. FACTS One afternoon in 2018, Z.W. and I.W. were at home. Three men holding guns and wearing masks entered. They zip tied Z.W.’s hands and ankles and pistol-whipped Z.W. At gunpoint,

I.W. handed the gunman an envelope with $20,000 in cash and a bottle with $13,000. The robbers took a bag with $150,000 to $170,000, mostly in new, sequentially numbered $100 bills. (People v. Glass (June 3, 2021, B303432 [nonpub. opn.].) A month after the robbery, sheriff’s deputies stopped Glass for traffic violations. Glass fled, pointed a gun at a deputy, and was arrested. In Glass’s pants were $6,300 in uncirculated, sequentially numbered $100 bills. The series’ dates on the bills were consistent with the stolen money from the robbery. (People v. Glass, supra, B303432.) In October 2018, Glass spoke on the phone from jail. He said it was a home invasion robbery, and even though he “didn’t go in there,” he could be charged with aiding and abetting. He added that his lawyer was saying, [A]ll right you didn’t go in but you still could get charged with fucking aiding and shit. Aiding.” (People v. Glass, supra, B303432.) The People introduced text messages between Glass and another gang member who texted Glass looking for “[s]umbody [sic] I could rob.” (Ibid.) He was looking to rob narcotics dealers. Glass responded, “[You] can’t rob them.” The gang associate then texted, “I just followed these [M]uslim people [home] today. . . . They had dough.” (Ibid.) The robbery victims are from Syria and speak Arabic and English. (Ibid.) Glass was convicted in a court trial of two counts of home invasion robbery (counts 1 and 2; Pen. Code, §§ 211, 213, subd. (a)(1)(A))1; assault with a firearm (count 5; § 245, subd. (a)(2)); and battery with serious bodily injury (count 6; § 243, subd. (d)). (People v. Glass, supra, B303432.) The trial court found true allegations that the crimes were committed to benefit a criminal