P. v. Rodriguez-Navarrette
Filed 1/13/10 P. v. Rodriguez-Navarrette CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Sacramento)
----
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. HERNAN GUILLERMO RODRIGUEZ-NAVARRETTE, Defendant and Appellant. | C061575 (Super. Ct. No. 08F05995) |
In May 2008, at the request of Child Protective Services, Sacramento County sheriffs deputies conducted a welfare check on a potential victim of sexual molestation. The minor, an 11-year-old female, was uncooperative with the deputies. Her mother, however, advised the deputies that the night before, the child reported being raped by defendant, Hernan Guillermo Rodriguez-Navarrette. The minors mother further reported that she had spoken to defendant, who lived in a neighboring apartment, and he had admitted to having intercourse with the minor.
According to the victims mother, defendant explained that the victim had come to his bedroom on May 18, 2008, and laid her head on his chest. They started kissing and he penetrated her with his finger. Defendant then realized what he was doing, stopped, and told the child to leave. The mother also told the deputies that the child had previously been molested by her grandfather.
A month later, the victim relayed her version of the assault. She remembered going to defendants apartment to see her friend, a young girl who lived with defendant. She went into defendants room to watch television. Defendant, who was lying on his back, pulled her to him and began French kissing her. She tried to get away but defendant was holding her down. She told defendant to stop but he did not; instead he climbed on top of her and tried to put his penis in her mouth. She said no and then went home. During a third interview, the victim disclosed that she and the defendant had intercourse that night.
Defendant, who was 19 years old at the time of the assault, admitted having intercourse with the victim one time. He also admitted knowing that she was only 11 years old. He was thus charged with three counts of committing a lewd act on a child under 14 years of age (Pen. Code, 288, subd. (a)): putting his mouth on the victims mouth (count one), putting his hand on the victims breast (count two), and putting his penis in the victims vagina (count three).
Defendant pled no contest to count three and stipulated to the low term of three years in state prison. In exchange for his plea, the prosecution dismissed the remaining charges. Defendant was later sentenced to the stipulated term and ordered to pay various fines and fees. Having obtained a certificate of probable cause, defendant appeals.
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks us to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having examined the record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
SIMS , J.
We concur:
SCOTLAND , P. J.
BUTZ , J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.
