People v. Rude CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 31, 2015D067437California3,001 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

I.

Although Rude challenges the court's use of the true finding of the violent felony

enhancement attached to the count 28 burglary conviction, he concedes sufficient

evidence supported the facts underlying that true finding. In October 2007, Rude entered

the home of Guillermo Martin in Hesperia, California. Another person other than an

accomplice was present in the residence. In the commission of the offense, Martin gave

Rude a check for $292,461 in return for what Rude claimed was a secured promissory

note.

The victims in this case are Carlos Echeveste, Claire Tolentino, Mark Singer, Rosario Navarro, Ronald Kurylowicz, Guillermo Martin, Juan Perez, Patricia "Ellen" Kirwan, Ronald Smaron, Richard Davenport, Brian Schrieber, and Steven Zorn.

3 Rude frames his contention as a question of law: "Preliminarily, there is no

dispute that another person was present when [he] entered the homes in question . . . .

That undisputed evidence is insufficient as a matter of law, however, to support the true

finding as to that one count (count 28)." Rude reasons: "No threat of violence was ever

present, and it is absurd to call what [he] did an…

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.