Court Opinion

ID: 9914973
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-01-03 21:02:03.77618+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:15:53.282811
License: Public Domain

Filed 1/3/24 P. v. Lugo 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   NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,                                                  B328865

         Plaintiff and Respondent,                           (Los Angeles County
                                                             Super. Ct. No. VA151601)
         v.

HENRY LEONARD LUGO,

         Defendant and Appellant.

     APPEAL from a judgment order of the Superior Court of
Los Angeles County, Roger T. Ito, Judge. Affirmed.
     Edward H. Schulman, under appointment by the Court of
Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
     No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
                        _______________
                       INTRODUCTION

      A jury convicted Henry Leonard Lugo on one count of first
degree murder, one count of second degree murder, and one count
of possession of a firearm by a felon. The jury found true the
special-circumstance allegation Lugo committed multiple
murders and the allegation he personally used and intentionally
discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury or death. We
appointed counsel to represent Lugo on appeal. After reviewing
the record, counsel for Lugo did not identify any arguable issues.
Nor, after reviewing the record, have we. Therefore, we affirm.

      FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

       On the evening of August 25, 2017 Lugo attended a party to
celebrate a peace treaty between rival gang members. When a
group approached Isaiah Alvarez and asked where he was from, a
fight broke out. After Alvarez was knocked unconscious and fell
to the ground, Lugo shot and killed him.
       On September 14, 2017 Lugo was walking with Ruben
Martinez, a fellow gang member, down an alley. Lugo allowed
Martinez to walk ahead of him before pulling out a handgun and
shooting Martinez six times from behind.
       Lugo was arrested on February 14, 2018. In subsequent
interviews with the police, Lugo waived his rights under Miranda
v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436 and confessed to killing Alvarez
and Martinez. On September 17, 2021 the People charged Lugo
with one count of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187),1

1     Statutory references are to the Penal Code.

                                2
one count of second degree murder (ibid.), and one count of
possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)).
       The jury found Lugo guilty on all counts and found true the
special circumstance allegation of multiple murders (§ 190.2,
subd. (a)(3)), as well as the allegation Lugo personally used and
intentionally discharged a firearm and proximately caused great
bodily injury or death. (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c), & (d).) The
trial court sentenced Lugo to two concurrent terms of life in
prison without the possibility of parole, plus two terms of 25
years to life for the firearm enhancements. The trial court also
imposed and stayed execution of a term of one year four months
on the conviction for possession of a firearm by a felon. Lugo filed
a timely notice of appeal.

                          DISCUSSION

       After reviewing the record, counsel for Lugo filed an
opening brief raising no issues. On October 28, 2023 counsel
advised Lugo that he intended to file a brief raising no issues and
that Lugo had the right to file a supplemental brief. On
November 3, 2023 counsel sent Lugo the transcripts of the record
of appeal and a copy of the opening brief. On October 30, 2023 we
advised Lugo he had 30 days to submit a supplemental brief or
letter stating any grounds of an appeal, contentions, or
arguments he wanted us to consider. We have not received a
response from Lugo.
       We have examined the record and are satisfied that
appellate counsel for Lugo has complied with his responsibilities
and that there are no arguable issues. (See Smith v. Robbins

                                 3
(2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th
106, 118-119; People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441-442.)

                         DISPOSITION

      The judgment is affirmed.

                                          SEGAL, Acting P. J.

            We concur:

            FEUER, J.

            MARTINEZ, J.

                                  4