People v. Sanchez, B195649 (Cal. App. 6/17/2008), B195649
| Decision Date | 17 June 2008 |
| Docket Number | B195649 |
| Parties | THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JULIO CESAR SANCHEZ, Defendant and Appellant |
| Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. VA096891, Larry S. Knupp, Judge. Affirmed.
Susan L. Wolk, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Victoria B. Wilson and Mary Sanchez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Julio Cesar Sanchez appeals from the judgment entered following his conviction by a jury on one felony count of possession of heroin and one misdemeanor count of giving false information to a police officer. We affirm.
Sanchez was charged by information with one count of possession of cocaine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351) (count 1); one count of possession of methamphetamine for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11378) (count 2); one count of possession of heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) (count 3); and one count of giving false information to a police officer (Pen. Code, § 148.9, subd. (a)) (count 4). As to the first three counts, it was specially alleged Sanchez had served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Sanchez pleaded not guilty and denied the special allegation.
The day after jury selection had been completed and the jury pre-instructed, Sanchez asserted his Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment right under Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 [95 S.Ct. 2525, 45 L.Ed.2d 562] (Faretta) to represent himself. The court required Sanchez to complete an advisement and waiver of counsel form (commonly referred to as a Faretta waiver) to ensure Sanchez understood the dangers and consequences of representing himself.1 The court also orally warned Sanchez of many of the dangers of self-representation reflected on the Faretta waiver, including that its After the trial court finished, Sanchez confirmed he still wished to represent himself and stated he would be ready to proceed to trial that afternoon. Sanchez's counsel was relieved.
On August 19, 2006 at approximately 11:00 p.m. Huntington Park police officers went to a bar to conduct a check of its alcohol beverage license. While walking through the parking lot located behind the bar, Officer Esteban Palacios and Officer William Wallace observed Ernesto Rosales appear to hide something in the rear seat of a Honda. The officers approached the Honda and asked Rosales to step outside the vehicle. Rosales complied. The officers searched the Honda after obtaining Rosales's consent, but found no contraband or anything suspicious.
After the Honda had been searched, Officer Wallace approached Sanchez and two other men, who had initially been standing between the Honda and Sanchez's Volkswagen parked approximately four feet away, but who had moved to the front of the Honda. As Wallace approached, he noticed a small matchbox — approximately one-half inch deep, one and one-half inches long and one inch wide — on the ground where the men had been originally standing. The matchbox, which bore the name and logo of "Bad Boys Bail Bonds," contained six small, blue-tinted plastic bags with what was later determined to be 2.26 grams of methamphetamine and five small, clear plastic bags with 2.01 grams of cocaine.
After Rosales, Sanchez and the other two men with Sanchez denied ownership of the matchbox, Officer Wallace obtained Sanchez's consent to search his Volkswagen. Wallace testified he found a clear plastic bag containing cocaine in a compartment on the driver's door. Wallace then noticed the Volkswagen's center console adjacent to the gear shift was loose, as if it had been manipulated, allowing its removal. Wallace lifted up the console and discovered a metal breath mint box and a black plastic bag. The metal box contained 29 small, blue-tinted plastic bags with 12.14 grams of a crystalline substance. (Two of the bags were tested, and it was determined they together contained 1.01 grams of methamphetamine.) The metal box also contained a black tar substance, later determined to be .68 grams of heroin, wrapped in clear plastic.2 Inside the black plastic bag were additional clear plastic bags with methamphetamine and cocaine. Wallace also found six or seven "Bad Boys Bail Bonds" matchboxes on the passenger seat.
Officer Palacios searched Sanchez and found $495 on him. He did not find any drug paraphernalia in Sanchez's possession or the Volkswagen.
Photographs of the recovered drugs, cash, and matchboxes and parts of the Volkswagen's interior were shown to the jury. The photographs of the Volkswagen's interior had a date stamp of August 19, 2006. The remainder of the photographs had a date stamp of August 20, 2006.
When Sanchez was booked into custody following his arrest, he told Officer John Castro, the custody officer, his name was Luis Enrique Sanchez and his birth date was March 24, 1979. Castro conducted a driver's license and criminal history search, but found no record of Luis Enrique Sanchez in either database. Based on Sanchez's mannerisms, Castro suspected Sanchez was not being truthful. After fingerprinting Sanchez, Castro determined his real name was Julio Cesar Sanchez, with a birth date of August 8, 1974, and he was on active parole. Sanchez then admitted this information was correct.
In his own defense Sanchez insisted the officers had planted the drugs in his car. He testified he did not use or sell drugs, the bag of cocaine the officers claimed was found in the Volkswagen's driver side door compartment had actually been in the officer's hand and he only had $37.17 when he was arrested.
Martin Gamez, one of the men standing with Sanchez between the Honda and the Volkswagen, testified that, although he saw the matchbox on the ground, he did not hear the police accuse Rosales of owning it, did not hear the police ask Sanchez for permission to search his car and did not see the police remove any drugs from the Volkswagen.
Rosales testified he was looking for clothes in the back of his car when the officers detained him. He stated he did not see the officers remove any drugs from Sanchez's Volkswagen.
During closing argument Sanchez argued, among other things, it was not plausible 12 baggies together containing 5.8 grams of drugs would fit in the small matchbox found on the ground3 and suggested the date stamp on the photographs of the drugs — one day later than the date stamp on the photographs of the Volkswagen — was suspicious. Sanchez also questioned why fingerprints from the evidence had not been taken.
The jury found Sanchez guilty of simple possession of heroin and giving false information to a police officer but was unable to reach a verdict on the charges of possessing cocaine and methamphetamine with intent to sell. The trial court declared a mistrial as to those counts. In a bifurcated bench trial Sanchez admitted the prior prison term enhancement. The court then sentenced Sanchez to an aggregate state prison term of three years: the middle term of two years for possession of heroin, plus one year for the prior prison term enhancement. Sanchez was also sentenced to a concurrent 90-day jail term, time he had already served.
Sanchez contends there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction for possession of heroin; the trial court erred in failing, sua sponte, to instruct the jury with CALJIC No. 12.32 explaining how to determine if he possessed a usable quantity of heroin and in disallowing his wife's testimony concerning a telephone call with police officers and his own testimony regarding the contents of the police reports; his waiver of his right to counsel was not made knowingly and voluntarily; the court failed to recognize its discretion to deny his untimely motion to represent himself and, in any event, abused its discretion in granting the motion; and the court erred in denying his suppression motion and his request for a transcript of the suppression hearing. Sanchez also requests we conduct an independent review of the trial court's in camera inspection of police officer personnel records following his request for discovery of those records and we either correct the ambiguous oral pronouncement of judgment or remand the matter for resentencing.
In reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, we (People v. Mincey (1992) 2 Cal.4th 408, 432; People v. Staten (2000) 24 Cal.4th 434, 460; People v. Hayes (1990) 52 Cal.3d 577, 631.) Our sole function is to determine if any rational trier of fact could have...
To continue reading
Request your trial