Opinion
B296591
07-09-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JUVENAL NUNEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
Maura F. Thorpe, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. TA146924) APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Hector E. Gutierrez, Judge. Affirmed. Maura F. Thorpe, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
INTRODUCTION
Juvenal Nunez appeals from the judgment after a jury convicted him of misdemeanor theft as a lesser included offense of robbery. We affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
A. Nunez Steals a Necklace
Fernando Aguilar called his wife to pick him up from a train station when he realized the train was not in service. Nunez was walking in front of Aguilar as Aguilar descended from the train platform and approached his wife's car. Suddenly Nunez punched Aguilar in the face. Nunez struck Aguilar three or four more times in the face and body, and pulled a chain from Aguilar's neck. Aguilar grabbed Nunez's shirt and pulled it off. Nunez fled, and Aguilar chased him, first on foot and then with his wife in her car. Aguilar signaled a deputy sheriff, stated he had been robbed, and pointed at Nunez. The deputy arrested Nunez. A search incident to Nunez's arrest yielded a silver chain that Aguilar said was his. Aguilar valued the chain at $180.
At trial, Nunez testified that Aguilar was the aggressor, that the chain came off when Aguilar took Nunez's shirt off, that Nunez never intended to take the chain, and that he wanted to return the chain to Aguilar. Nunez claimed he fled from Aguilar in fear, hoping law enforcement would help him.
B. The Jury Convicts Nunez, and the Trial Court Sentences Him
The People charged Nunez with one count of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211) and alleged he had served six separate prison terms within the meaning of Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b). Nunez pleaded not guilty and denied the allegations. The jury found Nunez not guilty of second degree robbery but convicted him of misdemeanor theft (Pen. Code, § 484, subd. (a)) as a lesser included offense. The trial court sentenced Nunez to 190 days in county jail with credit for time served. Nunez timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent Nunez in this appeal. After reviewing the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. On January 31, 2020 we gave Nunez notice he had 30 days to submit a brief or letter raising any grounds of appeal, contentions, or arguments he wanted us to consider. We have not received a response. We have examined the record and are satisfied that appellate counsel for Nunez has complied with her responsibilities and that there are no arguable issues. (See Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 ; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118-119; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
SEGAL, J. We concur:
PERLUSS, P. J.
FEUER, J.