Opinion
B228837
08-05-2011
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JENNIFER PLEYTEZ, Defendant and Appellant.
Jeffrey Scott Yanuck, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. LA056645)
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Joseph Brandolino, Judge. Affirmed.
Jeffrey Scott Yanuck, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for respondent.
INTRODUCTION
A jury convicted defendant and appellant Jennifer Pleytez of resisting, obstructing or delaying a peace officer in the performance of his duties, a misdemeanor. (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a).) The trial court suspended imposition of sentence and placed defendant on probation for a period of three years under various terms and conditions. On appeal, defendant's appointed counsel filed an opening brief in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 requesting this court to conduct an independent review of the record to determine if there are any arguable issues. In connection with that review, defense counsel requested this court to review the sealed transcripts of the in camera hearings the trial court held on defendant's Pitchess motion. On April 14, 2011, we gave notice to defendant that counsel had failed to find any arguable issues and that defendant had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions, or arguments she wished this court to consider. Defendant did not file a responsive brief or letter. We have reviewed the entire record and have determined that defendant's counsel has fully complied with counsel's responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. We also have reviewed the sealed transcripts of the in camera hearings on defendant's Pitchess motion and the peace officer personnel records the trial court reviewed in camera and have determined that no discoverable information was withheld. Accordingly, we affirm.
Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531.
BACKGROUND
Brian Pleytez (Brian), defendant's brother, was a member of the White Fence gang. An arrest warrant was issued for Brian for a "weapons violation." Brian Rodezno also was a White Fence gang member, and was a suspect in several shootings. About 7:00 p.m., on February 7, 2007, Los Angeles Police Department Officer Jeritt Severns, his partner, Officer Tracey Angeles, and other officers conducted a surveillance of an apartment complex on Victory Boulevard where Brian lived. The officers hoped to find Brian and Rodezno, who reportedly was living with Brian, at the apartment complex. Officers Severns and Angeles watched Brian's apartment for three hours but did not spot Brian or Rodezno. About 10:00 p.m., Officers Severns and Angeles ended their surveillance.
Shortly after Officers Severns and Angeles left the apartment complex, they were informed that an officer had seen two men at a bus stop near the apartment complex that the officer believed were Brian and Rodezno. Two officers approached the men at the bus stop. The officers detained one of the men who turned out to be Rodezno. The other man ran in the direction of Brian's apartment.
Officers Severns and Angeles put on their Los Angeles Police Department raid jackets and went to the door of Brian's apartment. Officer Severns broke the light bulb in a nearby light in order to conceal his and Officer Angeles's presence. Within a few seconds, defendant opened the door to Brian's apartment. Officer Severns illuminated defendant with his flashlight and advised her, in a loud voice, that "it was the police department." Defendant said, "Why the fuck are you harassing us?"
Officer Severns again identified himself as a police officer and told defendant that she and the rest of the persons in the apartment had to come outside. Officer Severns told defendant that if she did not come out, she would be arrested. Defendant did not comply and continued to "cuss" at Officer Severns and repeatedly ask him why he was harassing her. Defendant's sister Charlotte Pleytez, a White Fence gang member, also was in the doorway. Defendant made a telephone call in which she told someone that the police were there and were trying to get her to go outside.
Officer Severns believed that Brian was in the apartment. Officers Severns and Angeles decided to remove defendant and her sister from the apartment to keep the situation from escalating. As Officer Severns approached the front door, defendant approached him aggressively. Officer Severns did not know what defendant was going to do—"she was still very loud and cussing and totally noncompliant." Officer Angeles described defendant as angry to the point where defendant was not rational. In order to control the situation, Officer Severns grabbed defendant's wrists and told her to stop resisting, to face the wall, and to place her hands in back of her head. Defendant complied. At the same time, Officer Angeles struggled with defendant's sister.
Officer Severns grasped defendant's hands and started to handcuff her. Defendant then spun "pretty quickly" to her right, causing herself and Officer Severns to lose their balance and fall to the ground. Another officer rushed into the hallway and took control of defendant's arms and Officer Severns took control of defendant's feet. The officers took defendant out of the hallway and into the courtyard. Defendant struggled, twisted, and "cussed" while the officers took her to the courtyard. Once in the courtyard, defendant was placed in handcuffs. Officer Severns testified that defendant suffered an abrasion to her right cheek. Officer Severns did not recall whether defendant also suffered a bruise to her chin and an abrasion to her left knee.
In her defense, defendant called her fiancé, Lamont Brumfield. Brumfield testified that on February 7, 2007, he took defendant and her daughter to visit defendant's mother who lived in an apartment complex on Victory Boulevard. Whenever Brumfield took defendant to visit her mother, his practice was to return at 10:00 p.m. to pick up defendant. On February 7, 2007, when Brumfield was about five minutes from the apartment complex, he called defendant to tell her that he was on his way. Defendant told Brumfield that something was going on outside, and that there was a police officer with a shotgun. Brumfield told defendant to stay inside the apartment.
When Brumfield arrived at the apartment complex, he heard someone say, "Stop. You're hurting my sister." Brumfield saw defendant in the courtyard. Defendant was on the ground and her head was against the concrete. A police officer had his knee against defendant's neck and defendant's hands were pulled behind her back as if she were "hogtied." Defendant was crying.
Brumfield yelled at the officer, "What are you doing? That's my girl. That's my girl." The officer ordered Brumfield to leave. Brumfield complied, and stood outside the complex. At some point, an officer approached Brumfield and asked him to identify himself. Brumfield explained why he was there. The officer said that Brumfield was interrupting an investigation and that he smelled like alcohol. The officer told Brumfield to turn around and handcuffed him. Brumfield told the officer that he did not drink. The officer accused Brumfield of drinking and driving. The officer was "hyped up." Brumfield said he was sorry for whatever he had done, and the officer took off the handcuffs and told Brumfield to leave.
Defendant testified that Brumfield took her and her daughter to her mother's apartment at about 6:30 or 7:00 p.m. on February 7, 2007. Defendant's mother, her sister, and her younger brother were there. Defendant's sister told defendant that the police had raided the apartment early that morning and that there were undercover officers in the courtyard. Around 10:00 or 10:30 p.m., defendant noticed that the undercover officers had put on raid jackets and were armed with a shotgun. About that time, Brumfield called defendant. Defendant told Brumfield about the police presence. Brumfield told defendant to stay inside.
Defendant's sister heard a loud noise and opened the door to investigate. Police officers ordered everyone inside the apartment to come outside. Defendant went outside and saw seven or eight police officers. An officer told defendant to face the wall and put up her hands. Defendant complied.
Defendant tried to ask the police officers if she could retrieve her daughter from the living room. Officer Severns told defendant to shut up and face the wall. Defendant complied. Defendant turned her head because she wanted Officer Severns to understand that she just wanted to get her daughter. When she turned her head, Officer Severns grabbed defendant and slammed her against the wall. Then, Officer Severns slammed defendant on the ground. When defendant hit the wall, she suffered an abrasion to her cheek. Once defendant was on the ground, Officer Severns kicked her "pretty hard" four or five times with steel-toed boots. Next, Officer Severns picked up defendant like a "rag doll" and threw her into the courtyard. Defendant landed on her chin, and Officer Severns rushed up and placed his knee on her neck.
Officer Angeles placed defendant in handcuffs and had her sit on some nearby steps. Officer Severns told defendant that she was a bad mother for allowing her child to be around gang members. Officer Severns told defendant that he was the law, that the judge would believe him and not her, and that he could plant any evidence on her that he wanted.
Defendant testified that the police raid on her mother's apartment did not upset her because members of her family were gang members and police raids had been part of the normal routine when defendant lived with her mother. Defendant never yelled at the officers, "Why are you fucking harassing us?"
DISCUSSION
We appointed counsel to represent defendant in this appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed an opening brief asking this court to independently review the record in accordance with People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. In that brief, counsel requested that we review the sealed transcripts of the in camera hearings the trial court held on defendant's Pitchess motion. On April 14, 2011, we gave notice to defendant that counsel had failed to find any arguable issues and that defendant had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions, or arguments she wished this court to consider. Defendant did not submit a brief or letter. We have examined the entire record. Based on our review of the record, including the sealed transcripts of the in camera hearings on defendant's Pitchess motion and the peace officer personnel records the trial court reviewed in camera, we have determined that no arguable issues exist and that the trial court did not withhold any discoverable evidence. We are therefore satisfied that counsel has fully satisfied his responsibilities under People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
MOSK, J. We concur:
ARMSTRONG, Acting P. J.
KRIEGLER, J.