From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Sajid

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Sep 27, 2019
B293917 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2019)

Opinion

B293917

09-27-2019

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SALMAN SAJID, Defendant and Appellant.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. GA102106) THE COURT:

Salman Sajid appeals the judgment entered following a jury trial in which he was convicted of misdemeanor child abuse likely to produce great bodily harm (Pen. Code, § 273a, subd. (a); count 5) and simple battery as a lesser included offense to injuring a spouse after a prior conviction under section 243, subdivision (e) (§ 273.5, subd. (f)(2)), charged in count 8 of the information. The trial court sentenced defendant to 4 years of summary probation with 183 days in Los Angeles County Jail on count 5, and 3 years of summary probation with a consecutive 182 days in county jail on the count 8 lesser included offense, for total jail time of 365 days. The trial court further ordered that within 30 days of his release from custody defendant attend domestic violence counseling, a one-year parenting class, and complete 30 days of community service. The court imposed a $500 restitution fine, a $500 probation revocation fine, a $40 court operations assessment, a $30 conviction fee for each count, a $500 domestic violence fee, and a $1,000 payment to a battered women's shelter. The court also issued a 10-year criminal protective order as to the two victims.

Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

The jury acquitted defendant of count 6, dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)), count 7, criminal threats (§ 422, subd. (a)), and count 8, injuring a spouse after a prior conviction under section 243, subdivision (e)(1). (§ 273.5, subd. (f)(2).) --------

Defendant appealed the trial court's ruling, and we appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this court to independently review the record.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Amber and defendant married in February 2016, and had one child together. Amber's daughter from a prior relationship, Aubri, who was five years old in 2017, lived with Amber and defendant. Defendant began physically and verbally abusing Amber in January 2016, the first month of their relationship, and continued throughout their marriage. During that time defendant caused physical injury to Amber on at least three occasions, and the verbal abuse was almost a daily occurrence.

Afraid for her own life and the well-being of her children, Amber finally reported the abuse to police on September 22, 2017. Defendant had threatened Amber's life if she ever contacted the police, so she waited until he was out of the house to make the call. Amber turned over to police a video she had copied from one of the security videos of the inside the house and a photo that showed bruising after defendant had struck her in the face.

The video showed Amber pushing her baby in a stroller through the dining room toward the kitchen with Aubri walking beside them. Defendant blocked Amber's access to the kitchen, and told her she was required to give him 15 minutes notice and seek his permission before she could enter any area of the house, "so [he would not] have to see mommy's ugly face." Amber said she was hungry and refused to leave, prompting defendant to scream at her and call her names. Amber sent Aubri upstairs. Defendant can be seen in the video retracting his arm and then thrusting it forward. According to Amber, this was when defendant struck her in the face with a glass storage container, but a pillar blocks the view of any object contacting Amber's face.

Another video of the same incident from a different camera showed Amber make her way into the kitchen while defendant threatened and screamed at her. Defendant then forcibly removed the baby from Amber's arms and Amber ran upstairs.

Amber testified that on another occasion, she was heating food in a pan on the stove when defendant grabbed the pan and threw the hot food at her. Other violent outbursts included defendant pushing a box containing a large air compressor into Amber's abdomen, shoving her to the ground, and pinning her between a door and the wall while she was trying to walk through a hallway and get away from defendant. Defendant threatened Amber's life, too. He told her he would cut off her head and cut her body into pieces with his saw. Other times he threatened to have someone else kill her. He threatened to have Amber's children taken away from her.

Defendant participated in parenting Aubri by paying for half of her school tuition, attending a few parent-teacher conferences, and creating worksheets that Aubri completed with her mother. Defendant also physically disciplined Aubri, but Amber strongly disapproved of defendant's methods. A third video shown to the jury depicted defendant striking Aubri in the face without warning, causing Aubri to fall down and start crying.

Defendant's former girlfriend, Danielle, testified that she lived with defendant in 2010 or 2011. During their three-month relationship, defendant was physically abusive on four or five occasions. One of those times neighbors called the police because they heard Danielle screaming. Danielle contacted the police herself when defendant dragged her out of a swimming pool by her hair. Afterwards, defendant followed Danielle home where he continued pulling her hair, shoving her, and calling her vulgar names.

Another of defendant's former girlfriends testified that defendant was never violent with her. The woman who cleaned house for appellant when he and Amber were living together also testified. She saw Amber several times on the date of the video incident, but did not see any bruises on her face.

DISCUSSION

Based on our examination of the entire record we are satisfied that defendant's attorney has fully complied with her 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.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS. /s/_________
LUI, P.J. /s/_________
CHAVEZ, J. /s/_________
HOFFSTADT, J.


Summaries of

People v. Sajid

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO
Sep 27, 2019
B293917 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2019)
Case details for

People v. Sajid

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SALMAN SAJID, Defendant and…

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

Date published: Sep 27, 2019

Citations

B293917 (Cal. Ct. App. Sep. 27, 2019)