Filed 10/23/13 P. v. Trayham CA2/7 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS 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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for 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 SEVEN 

THE PEOPLE, 

 Plaintiff and Respondent, 

 v. 

ALFRED ELDRED TRAYHAM, 

 Defendant and Appellant. 

 B246899 

 (Los Angeles County 

 Super. Ct. No. BA398348) 

 APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Craig E. 

Veals, Judge. Affirmed. 

 Melissa A. Fair, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant. 

 No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. 

_______________________ 
2 

INTRODUCTION 

 Defendant Alfred Eldred Trayham appeals from a judgment of conviction entered 

after a jury found him guilty of first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) and found true 

the allegation that another person, other than an accomplice, was present in the residence 

(id., § 667.5, subd. (c)). The trial court sentenced Trayham to state prison for the middle 

term of four years. The court awarded Trayham a total of 249 days of presentence credit 

(217 actual days and 32 days of conduct credit). The court ordered Trayham to pay a $40 

court operations assessment (id., § 1465.8), a $30 criminal conviction assessment (Gov. 

Code, § 70373), and a $240 restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)). The court 

also imposed and suspended a $240 parole revocation fine (id., § 1202.45). 

FACTS 

 While Edwin Amaya was in the bathroom brushing his teeth and getting ready for 

work, he heard the front door to his apartment open and someone enter his living room. 

He heard the sounds of drawers opening and someone “looking for something.” At first 

he thought it was his wife, but he did not hear her voice. His three-and-a-half month-old 

son was sleeping in the living room. When Amaya went into the living room he saw a 

person who was not his wife, but was Trayham, holding a blue plastic bag. After 

noticing that the laptop computer was not where he had left it on the chair, Amaya asked 

Trayham what he was doing and knocked the bag out of Trayham’s hand. The bag broke, 

Amaya’s computer fell out, and Trayham left. Los Angeles Police Department officers 

arrested Trayham about a block away, and Amaya immediately recognized him. 

DISCUSSION 

 We appointed counsel to represent Trayham on appeal. After an examination of 

the record, counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues. On July 11, 2013 we advised 
3 

Trayham he had 30 days to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to 

consider. We have received no response to date. 

 We have examined the record and are satisfied that Trayham’s attorney has fully 

complied with the responsibilities of counsel and that there is no arguable issue. (See 

Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284 [120 S.Ct. 746, 145 L.Ed.2d 756]; People 

v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 118-119; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) 

DISPOSITION 

 The judgment is affirmed. 

 SEGAL. J.*

We concur: 

 WOODS, Acting P. J. 

 ZELON, J. 

 

* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to 

article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.