From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Rhodius

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN
Feb 8, 2012
B230940 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2012)

Opinion

B230940

02-08-2012

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANDREW CHRISTIAN RHODIUS, Defendant and Appellant.

Melissa J. Kim, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

(Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA088969)

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Charles Horan, Judge. Affirmed.

Melissa J. Kim, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

On the campus of Mount San Antonio College, Andrew Christian Rhodius borrowed Maddy Sukoru's cell phone, but refused to return it. Sukoru followed Rhodius to the parking lot and repeatedly demanded that Rhodius return the cell phone. Rhodius pushed Sukoru away and entered the front passenger seat of a car. Sukoru got into the back seat and attempted to reach for the phone in Rhodius's pocket. Rhodius struck Sukoru repeatedly in the head. After a professor intervened and told Rhodius to return the cell phone, Rhodius denied having it and left in the car. Sukoru's cell phone was never recovered.

A jury convicted Rhodius of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and misdemeanor assault (Pen. Code, § 240). At sentencing the trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed Rhodius on five years of formal probation, on condition he serve 236 days in county jail, with 134 days credit for time served. The court ordered Rhodius to pay a $80 security assessment, a $60 criminal conviction assessment, a $10 theft fine and a $200 restitution fine. The court imposed and suspended a parole revocation fine pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.45.

Rhodius filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Rhodius on appeal. After examination of the record counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On October 25, 2011, we advised Rhodius he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. No response has been received to date.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that Rhodius's attorney has fully complied with the responsibilities of counsel and no arguable issues exist. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The judgment is affirmed.

ZELON, J. We concur:

PERLUSS, P. J.

JACKSON, J.


Summaries of

People v. Rhodius

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN
Feb 8, 2012
B230940 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2012)
Case details for

People v. Rhodius

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. ANDREW CHRISTIAN RHODIUS…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SEVEN

Date published: Feb 8, 2012

Citations

B230940 (Cal. Ct. App. Feb. 8, 2012)