P. v. Carter

Filed 7/24/06 P. v. Carter 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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, Bruce F. Marrs, Judge. Affirmed.

Adam Axelrad, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Victoria B. Wilson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * * * * *

Appellant Michael Calvin Carter was charged with, and a jury found him guilty of, one count of forgery that occurred when he submitted an application for an identification card to be issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). He was sentenced to the low term of two years in state prison and appeals his conviction. We affirm.

FACTS

The application for an identification card, referred to as form DL-44, must be signed under penalty of perjury in the presence of a DMV clerk. The information from the application, which includes name, address, and identification number, is fed into the DMV computer. The applicant then proceeds to the DMV camera clerk with the form DL-44; the camera clerk requires a new signature from the applicant for comparison with the signature on form DL-44. The clerk then thumbprints the applicant and takes a photograph. The composite of the signature comparison, thumbprint and photograph is referred to as the Soundex system.

Appellant's conviction rests on the fact that on April 23, 2002, he presented a form DL-44 for the issuance of an identification card over the signature of â€