From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Thomas

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Three.
Nov 5, 2003
B166570 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 5, 2003)

Opinion

B166570.

11-5-2003

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VICTOR JAMES THOMAS, Defendant and Appellant.

Cheryl Lutz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


Victor James Thomas appeals the judgment entered after conviction by jury of four counts of robbery in which Thomas personally used a firearm. (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 12022.53, subd. (b).) We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

The evidence adduced at trial indicated Thomas committed two separate robberies from a white car driven by Jessica Sanchez on December 17, 2002. In the first, Thomas robbed three individuals at gunpoint. Each victim identified Thomas at the police station later that night and at trial. In the second, Thomas got out of a white car and demanded Johanna Roldans purse. After Roldan gave Thomas the purse, Thomas told Roldan to walk away. Roldan walked toward the white car where Thomas returned Roldans purse, minus $274 and cigarettes. Roldan sought the assistance of police officers who patrolled the area with Roldan. They located the white car and, after a car and foot pursuit, Thomas was detained. During the foot pursuit, Thomas discarded $274 and cigarettes. In the white car, officers found a purse containing a loaded . 38 caliber revolver and property taken from the three victims in the first robbery.

Thomas admitted a prior prison term allegation and the trial court sentenced Thomas to a prison term of 20 years and 4 months.

CONTENTIONS

After examination of the record, appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised and which requested this court to conduct an independent review of the record. On October 23, 2003, Thomas filed a supplemental opening brief in which he contends defense counsel rendered ineffective assistance.

DISCUSSION

1. Thomas fails to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel.

Thomas bases the claim of ineffective assistance on defense counsels failure to seek dismissal of the charges pursuant to Penal Code section 1118.1 at the close of the People case. Thomas asserts this prevented Thomas from obtaining the benefit of any doubt, detracted from the defense of the case and requires reversal.

In order to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must first show counsels "representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness . . . under prevailing professional norms." (Strickland v. Washington (1984) 466 U.S. 668, 687-688 [80 L.Ed.2d 674, 693- 694]; People v. Ledesma (1987) 43 Cal.3d 171, 215-216.) Second, the defendant must show prejudice flowing from counsels performance or lack thereof. (Strickland, supra, at pp. 691-692; Ledesma, supra, at pp. 217-218.) Where it is clear the alleged errors did not prejudice a defendant, a court may reject a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel without addressing the specifically challenged actions. (Peoplev. Price (1991) 1 Cal.4th 324, 440; Peoplev. Hayes (1990) 52 Cal.3d 577, 607-608.)

Thomas cannot establish prejudice in the failure to make a motion to dismiss because the evidence of Thomass guilt was overwhelming. Thus, a motion to dismiss at the close of the Peoples case would not have been granted. Defense counsel is not required to make meritless motions to avoid the later claim of ineffective assistance. (People v. Jennings (1991) 53 Cal.3d 334, 357.)

2. Review of the record.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied Thomass counsel has complied fully with counsels responsibilities. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 443.)

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

We concur: CROSKEY, J. and KITCHING, J.


Summaries of

People v. Thomas

Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Three.
Nov 5, 2003
B166570 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 5, 2003)
Case details for

People v. Thomas

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. VICTOR JAMES THOMAS, Defendant…

Court:Court of Appeals of California, Second District, Division Three.

Date published: Nov 5, 2003

Citations

B166570 (Cal. Ct. App. Nov. 5, 2003)