P. v. Jimenez

Filed 4/28/08 P. v. Jimenez CA2/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Stephen A. Marcus, Judge. Affirmed.

Lynette Gladd Moore, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

____________________

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Julio Cesar Jimenez appeals from a judgment of conviction following his no contest plea pursuant to a plea bargain. Defendant was convicted of corporal injury to a spouse, cohabitant, or childs parent (Pen. Code,  273.5, subd. (a)[1](count 2)) and criminal threats ( 422 (count 4)). The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for a total term of three years, that is, the mid-term of three years as to count 2 and, as to count 4, the upper term of three years, to be served concurrently with the sentence for count 2. The other three counts with which defendant was charged in the information were dismissed.[2]

FACTS

By stipulation, the factual basis for defendants plea is the content of the police report, the preliminary transcript, the complaint and the information.

Linda Garcia (Garcia) was defendants wife. The couple has an infant daughter. The couple was in the process of separating in August 2006. On August 8, 2006, Garcia received a telephone call from defendant, who said he wanted to see his daughter. Garcia agreed to meet him, with their daughter, at the intersection of Olympic Boulevard and Westmoreland Avenue.

When defendant drove up to Garcia at the location, he remained in his car and told Garcia to bring their daughter to him. Then he got out of his car, came over to Garcia, grabbed his daughter and told Garcia to get in the car.

Defendant forced Garcia into his car, locked the doors and windows and drove away. While he was driving, he began insulting Garcia and was apparently angry because she was dating another man. Defendant said that Garcia had to go back with him or he was going to kill her. When Garcia answered No, defendant hit her with his fist twice in the face, causing her to bleed. He continued yelling at Garcia. When their daughter started to scream, Garcia tried to get out of the car, but defendant grabbed her by her hair.

Defendant continued driving. Garcia could not get out and tried to signal people outside for help. Ultimately, she was able to move the gearshift into park. Defendant pulled over and the car stopped. Defendant grabbed a screwdriver, told Garcia he was going to kill her, pulled her over by her hair into his lap, and punctured her with the screwdriver twice, drawing blood. Garcia was then able to get out of the car.

On August 26, 2006, defendant telephoned Garcia and told her that he had damaged the truck belonging to her friend Abdon Corral (Corral). Corral had observed defendant scratch the trucks doors and damage the undercarriage. On August 28, Corral telephoned Garcia and said that he found a note on the door to his house, and the note said Im going to kill you . . . and also her. When Corral gave Garcia the note later, she recognized that it was in defendants handwriting.

DISCUSSION

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed a request for an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. This court notified defendant by letter dated November 14, 2007, that he had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions or arguments that he wanted us to consider. To date, we have received no response from defendant.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that defendants counsel has complied fully with her responsibilities. No arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118-119; People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

JACKSON, J.*

We concur:

VOGEL, Acting P. J.

ROTHSCHILD, J.

Publication Courtesy of California lawyer directory.

Analysis and review provided by Escondido Property line Lawyers.

San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com

[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

[2] The dismissed charges were kidnapping ( 207, subd. (a)), assault with a deadly weapon ( 245, subd. (a)(1)), and vandalism over $400 in damage ( 594, subd. (a)).

* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.