People v. Jones CA2/2 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  • Filed 9/26/14 P. v. Jones CA2/2
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.
    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
    SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
    DIVISION TWO
    THE PEOPLE,                                                          B253577
    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                   (Los Angeles County
    Super. Ct. No. NA096688)
    v.
    DONNY RAY JONES,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    THE COURT:*
    Donny Ray Jones appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial that
    resulted in his conviction for first degree burglary, with a person present (Pen. Code,
    § 459)1 and grand theft auto (§ 487, subd. (d)(1)). The trial court sentenced appellant to
    six years in state prison for the burglary and imposed a two-year sentence for the grand
    theft auto which was stayed pursuant to section 654.
    *
    BOREN, P. J., CHAVEZ, J., FERNS, J.†
    †     Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice
    pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
    1        All further references to statutes are to the Penal Code, unless stated otherwise.
    We appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. After examination of the
    record, counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which no issues were raised. On June 23,
    2014, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any
    contentions or issues which he wished us to consider. No response has been received to
    date.
    Appellant’s conviction was based upon the following facts: On August 24, 2013,
    at approximately 5:45 a.m. appellant went to the apartment of his ex-girlfriend, Shannon
    Arrendondo and threatened to kill her and her male companion. He broke a downstairs
    window to enter the apartment and ran upstairs searching for Arrendondo’s companion.
    Arrendondo ran outside and called the police. When Arrendondo returned to her
    apartment her car keys were missing and later that day she filed a stolen vehicle report.
    On August 27, 2013, Arrendondo’s stolen vehicle was seen by a police officer
    patrolling a housing development that was also being monitored by closed circuit
    television cameras. Appellant was standing by the vehicle when approached by police
    officers. The officers conducted a search of appellant and found the keys to
    Arrendondo’s vehicle. At trial, Arrendondo was shown a video of her vehicle being
    driven in the housing development and identified appellant as the driver.
    Arrendondo’s next-door neighbor testified that on the morning of
    August 24, 2013, she heard appellant screaming and saw him break the downstairs
    window of Arrendondo’s apartment. A few minutes later she saw appellant leave the
    apartment and drive away in Arrendondo’s vehicle.
    We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that appellant’s attorney has
    fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v.
    Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal. 3d 436
    , 441.)
    The judgment is affirmed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: B253577

Filed Date: 9/26/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021