From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Clark

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
Dec 3, 2008
No. B206382 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 3, 2008)

Opinion


THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent v. WILLIE RAY CLARK, Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B206382 California Court of Appeal, Second District, Sixth DivisionDecember 3, 2008

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

Superior Court County No. 2006036252 of Ventura, Edward F. Brodie, Judge

Lisa M. J. Spillman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

GILBERT, P.J.

Willie Ray Clark appeals a judgment entered following conviction by the court of one count of rape with a foreign object, and one count of forcible rape. (Pen. Code, §§ 289, subd. (a), 261, subd. (a)(2).)

All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

An amended indictment charged Clark with four counts of sexual offenses committed against victim L. on February 22, 1996. (§§ 261, subd. (a)(2), 286, subd. (c), 289, subd. (a).) The indictment also alleged circumstances within section 667.61, subdivision (e). A court trial followed. L., 78 years old at the time of trial, testified that she was the custodian of a Laundromat at the time of the offenses. After she closed the Laundromat for the evening, she was sexually assaulted by a person who had concealed himself within the facility. A video camera showed a person entering the Laundromat and concealing himself within the janitor's room. DNA laboratory testing established that Clark was the donor of the fluids obtained from a medical-legal examination of the victim. At trial, Clark testified that he had consensual sexual intercourse with L. that evening.

The trial court convicted Clark of rape with a foreign object, and forcible rape. The court found true the allegations of commission of the sexual offenses during a burglary, the personal use of a dangerous or deadly weapon, and the binding of the victim. (§ 667.61, subd. (e).) The court sentenced Clark to 25 years to life, plus a determinate consecutive sentence of six years. It awarded 428 days of presentence custody credits and imposed various fines and fees.

We appointed counsel to represent Clark in this appeal. After counsel's examination of the record, she filed an opening brief raising no issues.

On September 8, 2008, we advised Clark that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a response.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Clark's attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: YEGAN, J., COFFEE, J.


Summaries of

People v. Clark

California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division
Dec 3, 2008
No. B206382 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 3, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Clark

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent v. WILLIE RAY CLARK, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Second District, Sixth Division

Date published: Dec 3, 2008

Citations

No. B206382 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 3, 2008)

Citing Cases

People v. Clark

We affirmed the judgment on appeal. (People v. Clark (Dec. 3, 2008, B206382) [nonpub.…