Opinion
D042153.
11-25-2003
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOSE GOMEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
A jury convicted Jose Gomez of two counts of assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)), vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a)(b)(1)), and making a criminal threat (§ 422). The court sentenced him to prison for two years eight months: the two-year lower term on one count of assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury with a consecutive eight months for vandalism (one-third the middle term). It imposed concurrent terms on the remaining convictions.
FACTS
Viewing the record in the light most favorable to the judgment below (People v. Johnson (1980) 26 Cal.3d 557, 576, the following occurred. Nelson Zacarias testified that he knew Gomezs wife from Guatemala. Zacarias called Gomezs wife on December 8. Gomez came on the line and was angry. With his three-year old daughter, Zacarias went to an apartment resided in by Gomez and his wife Liliana. Gomez came down the stairs, hit Zacariass van with a rock, and threw the rock through the drivers side window hitting Zacarias in the arm. Zacarias testified that Gomez and Gomezs brother pulled him out of the van and hit him. Gomez pulled a knife, waved it at Zacarias, and told Zacarias he was going to kill him. Zacarias ran and called 911. Gomez got into a car and crashed it into the van. Zacariass daughter was in the van. Zacarias van sustained more than $4,000 damage.
Gomez testified that Zacarias told him over the telephone that he was going to take Gomezs wife and daughters and he would be at the apartment in an hour. When Zacarias arrived, Gomez picked up a rock and hit Zacariass window to distract him after Zacarias put his hand down by his side and Gomez knew his intentions were not good. Zacarias then crashed his van into a truck belonging to Gomezs brother. Gomez denied having a knife or threatening Zacarias.
DISCUSSION
Appointed appellate counsel has filed a brief setting forth the evidence in the superior court. Counsel presents no argument for reversal but asks this court to review the record for error as mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Pursuant to Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738, counsel refers to as possible but not arguable issues: (1) whether there was sufficient evidence to convict Gomez of assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury; (2) whether there was sufficient evidence to convict Gomez of vandalism causing over $400 damage; (3) whether there was sufficient evidence to convict Gomez of making a criminal threat; and (4) whether the trial court abused its discretion in denying Gomez probation.
We granted Gomez permission to file a brief on his own behalf. He has not responded. A review of the entire record pursuant to People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, including the possible issues referred to pursuant to Anders v. California, supra, 386 U.S. 738, has disclosed no reasonably arguable appellate issue. Competent counsel has represented Gomez on this appeal.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
WE CONCUR: NARES, J., HALLER, J. --------------- Notes: All statutory references are to the Penal Code.