P. v. >Taylor >























Filed 10/13/10 P. v. Taylor CA2/2

>

>

>

>

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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115 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




>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. WAYNE TAYLOR III, Defendant and Appellant.

B213328 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA336520)

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



Tracy J.
Dressner, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.



Edmund G.
Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle and
Michael C. Keller, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_____________

Appellant Wayne Taylor III appeals
from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of count 1, second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187,
subd. (a)), >[1] count 2, arson (§ 451,
subd. (d)) and count 3, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury
(§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). As to count
3, the jury found true the allegation that appellant personally inflicted great
bodily injury. (§ 12022.7, subd. (a).)

The trial court sentenced appellant
as follows: as to count 1, 15 years to
life; as to count 2, eight months (one-third midterm of two years) consecutive
to count 1; as to count 3, four years plus three years for the section 12022.7,
subdivision (a) enhancement to run consecutive to counts 1 and 2.

We affirm.

CONTENTIONS

Appellant contends that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to convict
him of murder or arson; (2) his rights to due process and a fair trial were
violated when the trial court refused to answer the jury's questions; (3) the
trial court erred in finding that appellant was competent to stand trial; (4) the trial court erred
in admitting hearsay statements; and (5) the judgment must be reversed because
appellant was never arraigned or asked to enter a plea.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Viewing the whole record in
the light most favorable to the judgment below as we must (People v. Ceja (1993) 4 Cal.4th 1134, 1138–1139), the evidence
established the following.

On December 19, 2007, the charred head, hands,
and feet of 63-year old Wayne Taylor, Jr. (Taylor), were found by firefighters
who were summoned to put out a fire in an abandoned strip mall.

The subsequent investigation revealed the
following. Taylor's son, appellant, was
a college graduate who had attended one year of law school and was in the
process of opening a music store. Appellant was bailed out of
jail on September 27, 2007, by his mother, who was
divorced from Taylor. Two days
later, appellant telephoned his cousin Brett Davis to tell him that he was
looking for investors to invest with him in a record shop. On September 30, 2007, Taylor's
neighbors Diana Juarez (Juarez) and her daughter Josseline Marroquin saw
appellant banging on the door of Taylor's apartment yelling, â€