P. v. Pimental
Filed 4/17/06 P. v. Pimental CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JOHNNY ANGEL PIMENTEL, Defendant and Appellant. |
F047076
(Super. Ct. No. MCR017447)
OPINION |
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Edward P. Moffat, II, Judge.
Meredith J. Watts, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jo Graves, Assistant Attorney General, Brian Alvarez and William K. Kim, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
-ooOoo-
Johnny Angel Pimentel (defendant) appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial that resulted in his conviction for assault. Defendant argues that the imposition of the upper term for his convictions was unconstitutional pursuant to Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 (Blakely). In light of our Supreme Court's recent ruling in People v. Black (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1238 (Black), we affirm.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
On December 24, 2003, Desirae Rios was attending a party with her friends, Esteban Munoz and Judy Velazquez, when she decided to call her boyfriend. Desirae's boyfriend said that he was at â€
