THE PEOPLE v. RAYMOND MANUEL FUENTES JR

Reset A A Font size: Print

Court of Appeal, Fifth District, California.

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RAYMOND MANUEL FUENTES, JR., Defendant and Appellant.

F061382

Decided: October 28, 2011

John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

O P I N I O NFACTS

A jury convicted appellant, Raymond Manuel Fuentes, Jr., of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen.Code,1 § 245, subd. (a)(1);  count 1), carrying a dirk or dagger concealed upon his person (§ 12020, subd. (a)(4);  count 2), felony vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a);  count 3);  and making criminal threats (§ 422;  count 4).   In a separate proceeding, appellant admitted an enhancement allegation that he had served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).  The court imposed a prison term of six years four months, consisting of the four-year upper term on count 1, eight months each on counts 2 and 4, and one year on the prior prison term enhancement.   On count 3, the court imposed, and stayed pursuant to section 654, a concur

1 rent two-year midterm.   The court awarded appellant 237 days of presentence credit, consisting of 159 days of actual time credit and 78 days of conduct credit.

Appellant's appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks that this court independently review the record.  (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)   Appellant has not responded to this court's invitation to submit additional briefing.   We will affirm.

In 2009, appellant began living in an RV parked near an unoccupied house owned by his uncle, Jimmy Fuentes, and Jimmy's two daughters, Cynthia Fuentes–Palomo and Christie Fuentes, with the understanding that he would watch over the house and prevent any vandalism.2  Jimmy and his daughters had previously put the house up for sale, and at some point after appellant parked his RV on the property, they decided to renew the listing and actively pursue the sale.

At approximately 4:00 p.m. on April 15, 2010, Cynthia was in her car, parked near the house, waiting for the arrival of a realtor with whom she had agreed to meet, when she saw appellant, who was in his truck, talking to Jimmy, who was standing next to the truck.   Appellant was upset because he had been told Cynthia was there to tow his RV off Jimmy's property.   Appellant had been told by Jimmy approximately one month previously that the house was to be sold and he would have to move.

Cynthia drove down the street a short distance and stopped to take a call on her cell phone.   Shortly thereafter, appellant drove up to next to Cynthia, stopped and began screaming profanities at her.   Shortly after that, appellant, after pulling forward in front of Cynthia's car, backed his truck into Cynthia's car, pushing her back approximately 15 to 20 feet.   Appellant then drove off at a high rate of speed.

Approximately 20 to 30 minutes after the incident, Jimmy entered the house.   The living room windows, kitchen windows and door by the dining room windows were broken, and the kitchen and dining room were flooded with water.   A hose was inside the house and the water was running slightly.   Jimmy testified that the last time he had been at the house was the day before the incident.   He did not go inside, but from his vantage point standing on the front lawn, he observed that the living room windows were not broken.

Later that day, about the time it was getting dark, appellant returned to the residence.   Jimmy and several other family members were present.   Appellant said to them, at least three times, “I'm going to kill you.”   He also said, “I'll find out where you stay,” and “the cops aren't going to stop me, I'm going to get you no matter what,” or words to that effect.

Subsequently, a police officer arrived at the residence, made contact with appellant, and arrested him.   Thereafter, during a search of appellant's person, the officer found a steak knife in appellant's back pocket, underneath his shirt.

DISCUSSION

Following independent review of the record, we have concluded that no reasonably arguable legal or factual issues exist.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

FOOTNOTES

FOOTNOTE.  

FN1. Except as otherwise indicated, all further statutory references are to the Penal Code..  FN1. Except as otherwise indicated, all further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

FN2. For the sake of clarity and brevity, and intending no disrespect, we will refer to Jimmy Fuentes and Cynthia Fuentes–Palomo by their first names..  FN2. For the sake of clarity and brevity, and intending no disrespect, we will refer to Jimmy Fuentes and Cynthia Fuentes–Palomo by their first names.

THE COURT 1 FN1. Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., and Poochigian, J.