P. v. Rodgers

Filed 10/24/06 P. v. Rodgers CA2/8

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. George Genesta, Judge. Affirmed.

William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

___________________________

At 4:00 a.m. one November morning in 2005, police stopped a speeding car in which appellant Tony M. Rodgers (also known as Nathaniel Anthony Rogers) was a passenger. During the traffic stop, the officer became suspicious when he saw a woman’s purse in the back seat even though both appellant and the driver were male. At the officer’s request, the driver let the officer search the car.

During his search, the officer discovered methamphetamine in the car’s center console. He also found a number of items that he believed were burglary tools, including tile and glass cutting tools, flashlights, and gloves. In addition, he found on the floorboard next to appellant a flashlight, two black knit hats, and latex gloves, plus a single glove, the missing companion of which fell off appellant’s lap when he stepped out of the car. Finally, the officer discovered the purse, digital camera, and other personal property of Robin Deberard stolen from her car the previous evening, and the wallet of Richard Trudeau stolen from his truck that evening, too.

The officer arrested both men. Appellant denied the methamphetamine was his, but admitted using methamphetamine a few days earlier. Appellant additionally denied at first knowing anything about the stolen property. He told police the driver was a friend who was merely giving him a ride home. They got lost, appellant explained, and were trying to find their way home when the police pulled them over. But, as police continued interviewing appellant, he changed his story. He acknowledged the driver had stopped to “hit” Trudeau’s and Deberard’s vehicles, while he stayed in the car and remained completely uninvolved. And in response to yet more questioning, he finally admitted he had gotten out of the car and stood as a lookout while the driver broke into the vehicles.

The People charged appellant with burglary of Deberard’s car, receiving stolen property, petty theft of Trudeau’s property, petty theft with a prior, and possession of methamphetamine. The People also alleged several prior convictions.

Appellant pleaded not guilty. The court bifurcated trial of the special allegations, and the jury convicted appellant as charged. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial of the prior conviction allegations and admitted one allegation and the court found a second one true. The court sentenced appellant to state prison for three years and eight months.

This appeal followed. We appointed appellate counsel, who filed a brief stating he could not find any arguable issues for appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) On September 5, 2006, we sent a letter to appellant inviting him to submit a letter or brief raising any issues he wished us to consider. Two weeks later, he filed a three-page letter asserting there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions because he was merely an innocent passenger in the car, and neither the stolen property nor narcotics were his. According to him, the evidence showed no more than his presence on the scene when the driver committed the burglaries. We have reviewed the record, paying particular attention to the sufficiency of the evidence. We find no arguable issues for appeal. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

DISPOSITION

The judgment is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

RUBIN, J.

We concur:

COOPER, P. J.

FLIER, J.

Publication courtesy of California pro bono legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by La Mesa Property line Lawyers.