People v. Lafourche CA4/2
Opinion
Opinion
statement of the case, and identifying four potentially arguable issues: (1) whether
substantial evidence supports the verdicts; (2) whether the court abused its discretion in
denying defendant’s Marsden2 motion; (3) whether the court abused its discretion in
denying defendant’s Romero3 motion; and (4) whether the court erred in finding section
654 inapplicable at sentencing.
We offered defendant the opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, which
he has not done. We affirm.
2 People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.
3 People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Defendant’s mother testified that defendant had been living in her converted,
detached garage for about a year. Defendant would occasionally stay with his father, who
lived in another home in the same city.
Defendant moved out of his mother’s garage sometime in January 2024 because
he became angered when she requested that he contribute financially to the home: “I was
buying his food and everything and paying the electric bill and everything, and after
months and months, I just couldn’t pay my property taxes, so I was letting him know that