Filed 10/31/13 P. v. Rodriguez CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E058227
v. (Super.Ct.No. BAF1200188)
RICHARD RODRIGUEZ, JR., OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Gary B. Tranbarger,
Judge. Affirmed.
Richard Schwartzberg, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant
and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant Richard Rodriguez, Jr., appeals following his conviction for
misdemeanor assault, as a lesser included offense. We will affirm the conviction.
1
PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Defendant was charged by a second amended information with felony assault by
means of force likely to produce great bodily injury. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4).)1
The information also alleged four strike priors. (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (c), (e)(2)(A),
1170.12, subd. (c)(2)(A).) A jury found him guilty of simple assault, a misdemeanor
(Pen. Code, § 240), as a lesser included offense. The court sentenced defendant to a term
of 180 days in local custody, with credit for 180 days served.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
FACTS
On October 20, 2011, while incarcerated in a Riverside County jail facility in
Banning, defendant was involved in an altercation in which he and four other inmates
punched another inmate, Arguelles. Riverside County Deputy Sheriff Evan Bechtold
reviewed the surveillance tape and observed that defendant was one of the inmates
assaulting Arguelles. A videotape of the incident was played for the jury. Photographs
of Arguellas taken by Deputy Bechtold after the incident (exhibits 5-8) showed cuts
on his forehead and around his eyes. Bechtold also took photographs of defendant
(exhibits 14 & 16), showing that his right hand was swollen while his left hand was not.
The photograph also showed that the knuckles of defendant’s right hand were reddened.
1 The second amended information alleges the assault by means of force likely to
produce great bodily injury as a violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1).
However, that offense is set forth in subdivision (a)(4). Subdivision (a)(1) prohibits
assault with a deadly weapon or instrument.
2
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. After examination
of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court to
independently review the record. We offered defendant the opportunity to file any
supplemental brief he deemed necessary, but he did not do so.
We have examined the entire record and have found no error. We are satisfied
that defendant’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable
issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 109-110; People v. Wende (1979) 25
Cal.3d 436, 441.) In reaching this conclusion, we examined the sufficiency of the
evidence to support the conviction, as mentioned by appointed counsel but not argued.
We are satisfied that substantial evidence supports the conviction.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
McKINSTER
Acting P. J.
We concur:
RICHLI
J.
MILLER
J.
3