People v. Morales CA2/5

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 29, 2015B256124California1,756 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mosk, J.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant and appellant Arthur Morales (defendant) was convicted of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 2111). On appeal, appointed counsel for defendant filed an opening brief in accordance with People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 requesting that this court conduct an independent review of the record to determine if there are any issues which if resolved in defendant’s favor would require reversal or modification of the judgment or appealable order. On October 3, 2014, we gave notice to defendant that his counsel had failed to find any arguable issues and that defendant had 30 days within which to submit by brief or letter any grounds of appeal, contentions, or arguments he wished this court to consider. Defendant filed a letter brief2 in which he contends that there was not substantial evidence in support of his conviction, and his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the record and affirm the judgment.

BACKGROUND

A. Factual Background

1. Prosecution Evidence Hong Truong was the only witness who testified at trial. At about 9:00 a.m. on November 16, 2012, a man wearing a hooded sweater and holding a shotgun, walked…

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.