Valladares

People v. Valladares

Good Law
173 Cal. App. 4th 1388·2009 Cal. App. LEXIS 760·93 Cal. Rptr. 3d 822
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 15, 2009G039799California4,004 words

Opinion

Opinion

O'Leary, J.

Angel Vicente Valladares appeals from a judgment after a jury convicted him of the manufacture, distribution, and sale of false immigration documents. He argues (1) Penal Code section 113, the statute he was convicted of violating, was repealed by implication by section 112; (2) the trial court erroneously failed to instruct the jury on the lesser included offense of section 112; (3) insufficient evidence supports his conviction; (4) his conviction violates the equal protection clause; and (5) the prosecutor committed misconduct during rebuttal argument. None of his contentions has merit, and we affirm the judgment.

FACTS

Investigator Tanya Hauge was investigating a false document operation in Santa Ana when she learned she could obtain counterfeit documents at a nearby shopping center. Hauge and another undercover officer drove in an unmarked van to the shopping center where they saw Valladares talking with a group of people. Hauge’s and Valladares’s eyes met, and Hauge mouthed the word, “MICA,” a term Hispanics use to refer to legal permanent resident cards. Valladares approached and, in Spanish, asked Hauge what she needed. She responded an identification card and…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.