Filed 6/27/24 P. v. Carbajal CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions 

not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion 

has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

 Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

RAMON CARBAJAL,

 Defendant and Appellant.

2d Crim. No. B332582

(Super. Ct. No. 2023003776)

(Ventura County)

Ramon Carbajal appeals a judgment entered following his 

conviction of assault with a deadly weapon (knife), with findings 

concerning arming with a deadly weapon, victim vulnerability, 

and criminal history. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1)1; Cal. Rules 

of Court, rule 4.421(a) & (b) [circumstances in aggravation].)

On May 1, 2023, the prosecutor filed a felony information 

charging Carbajal with assault with a deadly weapon and 

alleging special sentencing allegations. (§ 245, subd. (a)(1); Cal. 

Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(2), (3) & (b)(1)-(5).) Following a jury 

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2

trial, Carbajal was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon and 

two special allegations were found true (arming with a deadly 

weapon and victim vulnerability). Separately, Carbajal admitted 

four special allegations concerning his criminal history. 

On October 6, 2023, the trial court sentenced Carbajal to a 

midterm three years’ imprisonment. The court imposed a $300 

restitution fine and a $300 parole revocation restitution fine 

(suspended) and awarded Carbajal 469 days of presentence 

custody credit. (§§ 1202.4, subd. (b), 1202.45.)

Evidence at trial established that D.A., a middle-school 

student, and four of her friends were walking to Starbucks after 

school. Carbajal walked behind the girls; he was mumbling and 

smelled of marijuana. He held a pocketknife in his hand which 

he picked up from the ground. 

Carbajal walked closely behind D.A. The other girls ran 

away. D.A. began to run when Carbajal waved the knife. She 

felt the knife poke her on her back resulting in a scratch. 

Starbucks employees saw the incident and summoned police.

We appointed counsel to represent Carbajal in this appeal. 

After counsel’s examination of the record, counsel filed an 

opening brief raising no issues.

On April 16, 2024, we advised Carbajal that he had 30 days 

within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that 

he wished to raise on appeal. We have not received a response.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that 

Carbajal’s attorney has fully complied with his responsibilities 

and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 

Cal.3d 436, 441.)
3

We affirm the judgment.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J.

We concur:

YEGAN, J.

CODY, J.
Maureen Houska, Judge

Superior Court County of Ventura

______________________________

Ryan Peabody, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, 

for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.