P. v. Lopez
Filed 4/26/11 P. v. Lopez 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SAMUEL ROBERT LOPEZ, Defendant and Appellant. | F059778 (Super. Ct. No. F09905772) OPINION |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Mark W. Snauffer, Judge.
Michael B. McPartland, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Stephen G. Herndon and Darren K. Indermill, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
A jury convicted appellant Samuel Robert Lopez of rape by use of drugs, sexual penetration against someone who was prevented from resisting by intoxication, and two counts of oral copulation against someone prevented from resisting by intoxication. Lopez challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the rape and sexual penetration convictions. He also contends the trial court erred in imposing consecutive terms of imprisonment for the two oral copulation counts. We will affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
On February 20, 2008, R.G., age 17, and H.D., age 15, met up with Lopez, Rash, and Stewart after school. At a nearby gas station, Rash purchased a 32-ounce beer for R.G. and H.D. The group drove to another store where Lopez stole a bottle of rum. From there, they drove to Stewart's house, picked up some fruit punch and water bottles, and drove the van to a park.
One of the men used a knife to open the bottle of rum; the men mixed the rum and fruit punch in the water bottles. Everyone drank the mixture. Lopez told H.D. and R.G. â€
| Description | A jury convicted appellant Samuel Robert Lopez of rape by use of drugs, sexual penetration against someone who was prevented from resisting by intoxication, and two counts of oral copulation against someone prevented from resisting by intoxication. Lopez challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the rape and sexual penetration convictions. He also contends the trial court erred in imposing consecutive terms of imprisonment for the two oral copulation counts. We will affirm the judgment. |
| Rating |


