Filed 4/27/21 P. v. Campos CA2/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

DAVID CAMPOS,

Defendant and Appellant.

 B306206

 (Los Angeles County

 Super. Ct. No. KA099394)

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los 

Angeles County, David C. Brougham, Judge. Appeal dismissed.

Lise M. Breakey, under appointment by the Court of 

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_______________________________
2

In 2015, a jury found 21-year-old David Campos guilty of 

assault with a deadly weapon on his 23-year-old brother, Roque1

(Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(1);2count 1), assault with a deadly 

weapon on Roque’s girlfriend, Lizbeth Gonzalez (count 2), battery 

on Roque (§ 243, subd. (d); count 3), attempted murder of Roque 

(§§ 187, subd. (a), 664; count 4), and attempted murder of 

Gonzalez (count 5). As to all counts, the jury found true the 

allegation that Campos inflicted great bodily injury on the 

victims. (§ 12022.7, subd. (a).) As to counts 3-5, the jury found 

true the allegation that Campos used a deadly and dangerous 

weapon (a knife) in the commission of the offense. (§ 12022, 

subd. (b)(1).) Finally, the jury found true the allegation that 

Campos committed the attempted murder of Gonzalez willfully, 

deliberately and with premeditation. The evidence presented at 

trial established that in 2012, in an unprovoked attack, Campos 

stabbed Roque and Gonzalez at the family home where Campos, 

Roque, their parents, and another sibling lived.3

Campos presented an insanity defense. He waived his 

right to jury trial in the sanity phase of the trial. The only 

evidence presented were written reports prepared by two 

1

Because the brothers share the same surname, and to 

avoid confusion, we refer to appellant David Campos as Campos,” 

and we refer to his brother, Roque Campos, Jr., as “Roque.”

2 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

3

The circumstances of the stabbings are set forth more 

fully in our opinion in Campos’s direct appeal of his convictions. 

(People v. Campos (Jan. 12, 2017, B262258) [nonpub. opn.], pp. 3-

6.)
3

psychiatrists who both concluded Campos was not legally insane 

at the time of the stabbings. The trial court found Campos was 

legally sane at the time he committed the offenses and sentenced

him to life plus 15 years in prison. (People v. Campos, supra, 

B262258, pp. 7, 9-10.) 

In Campos’s direct appeal of his convictions, we affirmed 

the judgment. (People v. Campos, supra, B262258, p. 18.) 

Campos filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in this court, 

contending his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by 

failing to investigate and present evidence at trial supporting a 

diminished actuality defense. He asserted there was a 

reasonable probability the jury would have found him not guilty 

of the attempted murders if his counsel had presented evidence 

tending to show he actually did not form the specific mental 

states for the attempted murders. We issued an order to show 

cause and granted the petition, reversing the attempted murder 

convictions (counts 4 & 5), vacating Campos’s sentence, and 

remanding the matter for retrial on counts 4 and 5 and/or 

resentencing. (In re Campos (June 14, 2017, B270209) [nonpub. 

opn.], pp. 2, 22.)

Upon remand, the prosecution opted to retry the attempted 

murder counts. Campos filed various motions, including a 

motion to suppress evidence under section 1538.5. While the 

motion to suppress was pending, the parties reached a plea deal. 

On March 23, 2020, Campos waived his constitutional 

rights and pleaded no contest to the attempted murder of Roque 

(count 4) and admitted the personal use of a knife (§ 12022, subd. 

(b)(1)) and great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) 

enhancements as to that count. On the prosecution’s motion, the 

trial court dismissed count 5 (the attempted murder of Gonzalez). 
4

Pursuant to the parties’ plea agreement, on April 21, 2020, the 

trial court sentenced Campos to 13 years in state prison: the 

upper term of nine years for the attempted murder, plus three 

years for the great bodily injury enhancement and one year for 

the deadly and dangerous weapon enhancement. The court 

stayed the terms imposed on counts 1-3. 

Campos filed a timely notice of appeal, and this court

appointed counsel for him. After examination of the record, 

counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking this 

court to review the record independently pursuant to People v. 

Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). On February 17, 2021, we 

sent a letter to Campos and his appointed counsel, advising 

Campos that within 30 days he could personally submit any 

contentions or issues he wanted us to consider, and directing 

counsel to send the record and opening brief to Campos

immediately. Campos has not filed a supplemental brief.

We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that 

Campos’s counsel has complied with her responsibilities and that 

no arguable issues exist. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 

109-110; Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at p. 441.) Campos’s no contest 

plea and failure to obtain a certificate of probable cause limit the 

potential scope of his appeal to “[g]rounds that arose after entry 

of the plea and do not affect the plea’s validity” or “[t]he denial of 

a motion to suppress evidence under Penal Code section 1538.5.” 

(Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b); see § 1237.5.) The record does 

not demonstrate the existence of any such issue. As set forth 

above, the trial court had not heard Campos’s motion to suppress 

evidence under section 1538.5 at the time Campos entered his no 

contest plea.
5

DISPOSITION

The appeal is dismissed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

CHANEY, J.

We concur:

ROTHSCHILD, P. J.

FEDERMAN, J.*

* Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court, 

assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of 

the California Constitution.