Court Opinion

ID: 9892387
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-23 18:04:34.583143+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:04:56.900115
License: Public Domain

Filed 10/23/23 P. v. Herrera CA4/1
                 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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.

                COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

                                                 DIVISION ONE

                                         STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE,                                                          D081948

         Plaintiff and Respondent,

         v.                                                          (Super. Ct. No. SCN382416)

LOUIE SANTILLAN HERRERA,

         Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,
Robert J. Kearney, Judge. Affirmed.
         Cindy Brines, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
         In January 2020, Louie Santillan Herrera was convicted of multiple
felony counts arising from years of molestation of his stepdaughter. He was
convicted of two counts of oral copulation of a child under age 14 years and

was more than 10 years younger than Herrera (Pen. Code,1 § 288a,

1        All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
subd. (c)(1)); eight counts of lewd acts with a child under age 14 (§ 288,
subd. (a)) and two counts of sexual penetration of a child under age 14 (§ 289,
subd. (j)).
       The court sentenced Herrera to a determinate term of 22 years in
prison, including an upper term of eight years for count one.
       Herrera appealed and this court affirmed the convictions but vacated
the sentence and remanded the case for a new sentencing hearing in light of

intervening legislative changes to section 1170, subdivision (b)(2).2
       On remand, the prosecution declined to pursue an upper term for
count 1. The court reduced the sentence for count 1 to the middle term of six
years and the reimposed the remainder of the original sentence for a total
term of 20 years. Herrera filed a timely notice of appeal.
       Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any
arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to
independently review the record for error as mandated by Wende. We offered
Herrera the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not
responded.
       The facts of the offenses were fully discussed in our prior opinion. We
will not discuss them further here. (People v. Herrera, supra, D079275.)
                                 DISCUSSION
       As we have noted appellate counsel has filed a Wende brief and asks
the court to review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and
in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel
has identified a possible issue that was considered in evaluating the potential

2     The court affirmed the convictions in an unpublished opinion.
(People v. Herrera (Sept. 20, 2022, D078275).)
                                        2
merits of this appeal: Whether the trial court was required to impose the low
term sentence since the aggravating factors were not found true beyond a
reasonable doubt.
     We have reviewed the record as required by Wende and Anders. We
have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal. Competent
counsel has represented Herrera on this appeal.
                               DISPOSITION
     The judgment is affirmed.

                                                     HUFFMAN, Acting P. J.

WE CONCUR:

O’ROURKE, J.

RUBIN, J.

                                      3