P. v. Neufeld
Filed 5/13/13 P. v. Neufeld 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for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,
Plaintiff and
Respondent,
v.
WILLIAM JOSEPH NEUFELD, JR.,
Defendant and
Appellant.
2d Crim. No.
B242936
(Super. Ct.
No. F468767)
(San
Luis Obispo County)
A second amended
information charged appellant William Joseph Neufeld with (1) felony assault by
means of force likely to produce great bodily
(Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1));
name="_ftnref1" title="">[1] (2) a special allegation that appellant
personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)), rendering the
offense a serious felony
(§
1192.7, subd. (c)(8)); (3) felony battery with serious bodily injury (§ 243,
subd. (d)); (4) a second special allegation that appellant personally inflicted
great bodily injury
(§
12022.7, subd. (a)); and (5) four separate special allegations that appellant
suffered four separate and distinct convictions that resulted in his
incarceration in state prison. Appellant pleaded not guilty to these charges
and denied the special allegations.
Appellant twice moved
for substitution of counsel pursuant to People
v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118, 123.
The trial court denied both motions.
A jury convicted
appellant of count 1, felony assault by means of force likely to produce great
bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), but did not find that appellant
personally inflicted great bodily injury in the commission of that
offense. The jury found appellant not
guilty of count 2, felony battery with serious bodily injury (§ 243, subd.
(d)), but did find him guilty of the lesser included offense of misdemeanor
(§
242).
The parties agreed to
waive a jury trial on the issue of the four prior prison terms
allegations. The trial court sentenced
appellant to a total of seven years in prison, consisting of the upper base
term of four years on count 1 (felony assault), plus a term of one year on each
of three prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The court stayed imposition of the sentence
on the fourth prior prison term enhancement and sentenced appellant to six
months in county jail on count 2 (misdemeanor battery), to run concurrently
with the sentence on count 1. Appellant
was awarded 203 days of actual credit and 202 days of conduct credits, for a
total of 405 days of credit. The court
also ordered appellant to pay a restitution fine of $1,600, pursuant to section
1202.4, subdivision (b).
Appellant filed a timely
notice of appeal, and we appointed
counsel to represent him. Appointed
counsel filed a brief pursuant to People
v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, setting forth the facts of the case and
requesting that we review the entire record.
Appellant subsequently filed a two-page handwritten supplemental letter
brief in which he contends "this case lacks merit." We agree with counsel's conclusion that no
arguable issues exist. Accordingly, we
affirm.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Dr. Joan Odom, a
psychiatrist at Atascadero State Hospital (ASH), met with appellant, then a
patient at ASH, on December 15, 2011. Present in the examination room were two
experienced psychiatric technicians, Dennis Williams and Patricia Rasor.
Appellant asked for a
change in his medications, and Dr. Odom responded that his prescribed
medications were appropriate. At that
time, Williams was standing directly behind appellant and Rasor was in front of
appellant, to his left. Dr. Odom was
sitting on the other side of a table, approximately five feet away. Appellant started to become hostile, stood up
and "squared off" with Williams.
Although frightened, Dr. Odom calmed appellant down by threatening to
activate the alarm.
As the examination
continued, appellant became increasingly agitated and asked, "What, do I
have to hit someone to get what I want?"
Appellant then stood up, took a step towards Dr. Odom and hit her with
his fist, causing her head to hit against the wall. Williams then seized appellant from behind
and Rasor inserted herself between Dr. Odom and appellant, who had grabbed Dr.
Odom's ponytail. Rasor managed to remove
appellant's hand from Dr. Odom's hair and Williams took appellant to the
ground. Steve Walters, a unit
supervisor, heard Dr. Odom yelling "let go of my hair" and entered
the exam room. He saw Dr. Odom sprawled
on a chair, hair disheveled, and bleeding from her mouth and nose. As Williams and Rasor attempted to restrain
appellant, Walters picked up Dr. Odom and assisted her out of the room.
Although Dr. Odom did
not appear to lose consciousness, she believes she may have done so, because
she has little memory of the assault.
She did feel pain in the back of her head as it hit the wall. Dr. Odom was treated for her injuries, which
did not require hospitalization. She
returned to work after a period of absence.
Following the incident, appellant said he assaulted Dr. Odom because she
would not give him his medication.
Appellant testified on
his own behalf. He admitted having prior
convictions for felony grand theft and grand theft auto and for twice resisting
an executive officer. Appellant
testified he told Dr. Odom that he wanted additional medication to treat his
anxiety attacks and difficulty breathing.
He claimed that while he was making the request, Williams slammed him to
the floor, pushing Dr. Odom to the floor in the process. Appellant stated he did not lunge at or hit
Dr. Odom, nor did he grab
her
hair or push her into the wall.
Appellant denied admitting, after the incident, that "I hit her
because she wouldn't give me my meds."
Appellant further
testified that Rasor was not in the room when Williams threw appellant to the
floor, and that Rasor lied for Williams because she is Williams'
girlfriend. Appellant stated that Dr.
Odom has psychological problems herself and that she takes psychiatric
medication. He opined that Dr. Odom must
have been pushed because he did not hit her.
He stated that he does not hit females and that if he did hit her, she
would have been hurt.
DISCUSSION
In his supplemental
letter brief, appellant contends that this case "lacks merit" and
that he was a "scapegoat in a frivolous workmens comp case" brought
by Dr. Odom.
title="">[2] We disagree.
The substantial evidence supports the jury's determination that
appellant committed felony assault and misdemeanor battery on Dr. Odom by
hitting her with his fist, knocking her against the wall and then grabbing her
hair. Having examined the entire record,
counsel's Wende brief and appellant's
supplemental letter brief, we are satisfied that appointed counsel has fully
complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People
v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106,
123-124; People v. Wende,
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
PERREN,
J.
We concur:
GILBERT, P. J.
YEGAN, J.
Jacquelyn
H. Duffy, Judge
Superior
Court County
of San Luis Obispo
______________________________
William J. Neufeld, Jr.,
in pro. per.; Patricia A. Malone, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for
Plaintiff and Respondent.
name="_ftn1" title="">[1] All statutory references are to the Penal
Code.
a number of comments that have no bearing on his convictions, such as his views
on the crime rate and the prison system.
Because these issues are irrelevant to this case, they are not addressed
here.
