From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Ybarra

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Jul 21, 2008
No. F053854 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2008)

Opinion

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County No. 1225107 Donald E. Shaver, Judge.

Roberta L. Franklin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


OPINION

THE COURT

Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Gomes, J., and Dawson, J.

PROCEEDINGS

On April 25, 2007, an information was filed charging appellant, Dennis Ybarra, with two counts of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459). At the conclusion of a jury trial on August 13, 2007, Ybarra was found guilty of both counts. On September 10, 2007, Ybarra was sentenced to prison for the midterm of four years on count one and to a concurrent term of four years on count two. The court imposed various fines and awarded Ybarra custody credits of 258 days.

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

Ybarra’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief which summarizes the pertinent facts, raises no issues, and requests this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) The opening brief also includes the declaration of appellate counsel indicating that Ybarra was advised he could file his own brief with this court. By letter on March 3, 2008, we invited Ybarra to submit additional briefing. To date, he has not done so.

FACTS

On March 23, 2007, at 1:41 p.m., Deputy Noel Vento of the Stanislaus County Sheriff’s Department was dispatched to 1715 Seattle Street in Modesto to investigate a burglary. Vento contacted Francisca Castrejon and her brother-in-law, Mr. Clemente, who lived in a small apartment behind Castrejon. The second residence was located at 1717 Seattle Street. Castrejon’s front door was open and a window by the back door was broken. The residence was ransacked. There was a tire wrench near the point of entrance, which Vento believed to be the rear window.

The front door to Clemente’s residence had been smashed open. At the rear of the yard, Vento noticed a gate was slightly open. Both Castrejon and Clemente were missing property. Near the garage of Castrejon’s residence Vento found a shoe print in the yard. No resident of either property had a matching shoe pattern. Following the shoe print, Vento went into the alley and headed south into the rear yard of Ybarra’s home on Denver Street.

Ybarra’s mother told Vento she saw her son coming in from the alley carrying a computer. Ybarra told his mother he bought a computer and a television. Ybarra’s mother gave Vento consent to search her home. Vento and Deputy Humble conducted the search. Ybarra was in a bedroom. Vento told Ybarra why he was inside the home. Ybarra consented to a search of his room.

Humble showed Vento a pair of tennis shoes behind Mrs. Ybarra’s bedroom door. The pattern on the bottom of the shoes was “the same similar shoe pattern” Vento followed through the alley. The deputies found a television, a VCR, a computer, and computer speakers in the home. The computer speakers and VCR were not connected. The VCR was on Ybarra’s bed. The computer was also not plugged in. The victims identified their property.

The tennis shoes were accepted into evidence. The shoeprints found by Ybarra’s home and the gate of the victims’ home were unique because of a swirl, overlay pattern and a perfectly round circle with the letter “P” in the middle. Humble testified that the pattern on the tennis shoes was original and matched the pattern found in the dirt. A compact disc recording and transcript of Ybarra’s statement to investigators after his arrest were also admitted into evidence. Ybarra told investigators that he purchased the property they found in his home with money his mother gave him.

Ybarra’s mother denied telling the officer she saw her son carrying the computer. Ybarra’s mother explained that her son told her he purchased the property.

The trial court gave the jury complete instructions on burglary.

After independent review of the record, we have concluded no reasonably arguable legal or factual argument exists.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.


Summaries of

People v. Ybarra

California Court of Appeals, Fifth District
Jul 21, 2008
No. F053854 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2008)
Case details for

People v. Ybarra

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DENNIS YBARRA, Defendant and…

Court:California Court of Appeals, Fifth District

Date published: Jul 21, 2008

Citations

No. F053854 (Cal. Ct. App. Jul. 21, 2008)