From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Castaneda

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Dec 30, 2011
G045541 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2011)

Opinion

G045541 Super. Ct. No. 07CF3336

12-30-2011

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHRISTOPHER CASTANEDA, Defendant and Appellant.

John L. Dodd, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule

OPINION

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Carla Singer, Judge. Affirmed.

John L. Dodd, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Ever Linares, Hector Jimenez, and Chrystal Cuevas were "hanging out" on a street corner when defendant Christopher Castaneda and co-defendant Carlos Flores drove up and asked Linares "where was he from." Linares responded "K.P.C.," for "Krazy Proud Criminals," a rival gang to the Latin Boys, of which defendant was a member. Linares ran when defendant and Flores starting fighting with him but they caught him and began hitting him again. Jimenez found Linares about 20 or 25 minutes later with multiple stab wounds to his stomach. When arrested nine days later, defendant had an injury on his knuckle, which was scabbed and healing. The parties stipulated "Linares suffered great bodily injury" due to the stabbing.

A jury found defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1); all further statutory references are to this code) and street terrorism (186.22, subd. (b)(1)). It also found true allegations defendant had committed the assault for the benefit of a street gang and had personally inflicted great bodily injury. The trial court sentenced defendant to a term of 16 years and imposed restitution and parole revocation fines, a security fee, and a criminal conviction assessment.

We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed a brief summarizing the facts and proceedings below. He did not argue against defendant but advised the court he had not found any issues to present on defendant's behalf. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 [87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493], counsel identified the possible, but not arguable, issue of whether substantial evidence supports the finding he personally committed great bodily injury. We conclude it does.

"[W]hen a defendant participates in a group beating and when it is not possible to determine which assailant inflicted which injuries, the defendant may be punished with a great bodily injury enhancement if his conduct was of a nature that it could have caused the great bodily injury suffered." (People v. Corona (1989) 213 Cal.App.3d 589, 594; cf. People v. Magana (1993) 17 Cal.App.4th 1371, 1381 [impossibility of proving which injuries were caused by the defendant not shown where each assailant shot different type of firearm, police recovered different types of bullets and cartridges, and prosecution could have presented expert testimony on which firearm discharged which bullet].)

Here, there was evidence both defendant and Flores participated in the attack on Linares, culminating in the stab wounds to his stomach, and the jury reasonably could have concluded it was not possible to trace his injuries to a particular assailant. Viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the judgment (People v. Ochoa (1993) 6 Cal.4th 1199, 1206), substantial evidence supports the verdict.

Defendant was given 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf. That period has passed, and we have received no communication from him. We have examined the record and found no arguable issue. (People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.)

The judgment is affirmed.

___________________________

RYLAARSDAM, ACTING P. J.
WE CONCUR:

___________________________

BEDSWORTH, J.

___________________________

FYBEL, J.


Summaries of

People v. Castaneda

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Dec 30, 2011
G045541 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2011)
Case details for

People v. Castaneda

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. CHRISTOPHER CASTANEDA, Defendant…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE

Date published: Dec 30, 2011

Citations

G045541 (Cal. Ct. App. Dec. 30, 2011)