Court Opinion

ID: 9945937
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-28 20:02:54.325954+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:23:20.965612
License: Public Domain

Filed 2/28/24 P. v. Picasso 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                 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                                          D082350

         Plaintiff and Respondent,

         v.                                                          (Super. Ct. No. SCD296717)

ALBERTO PICASSO,

         Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County,
Marian F. Gaston, Judge. Affirmed.
         James M. Kehoe, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
         A jury convicted Alberto Picasso of seven different offenses including
driving a vehicle without consent (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)); fraudulent

possession of identification materials (Pen. Code,1 § 530.5, subd. (c)(1));

1     All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise
specified.
possession of burglary tools with intent to break into a home, building or
vessel (§ 466); possession of a stolen vehicle (§ 496d); and petty theft (§ 484).
Picasso admitted two aggravating factors within the meaning of California
Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(3).
      The court struck the true finding on the strike prior (§ 667,
subds. (b)-(i)). Picasso was sentenced to a term of nine years in prison.
      Picasso 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
Picasso the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal, but he has not
responded.
                           STATEMENT OF FACTS
      Appellate counsel has provided a detailed summary of the facts of the

various offenses. We will incorporate the summary into this opinion.2
      At about 9:00 p.m. on May 2, 2022, D.V. parked his 1990 Acura outside
his home. The next morning, he found the car was gone and the keys were
still in his possession. He did not know Picasso and did not give him
permission to take or drive his car.
      On May 4, 2022, Officer Ibarra was on patrol when he noticed a 1990
Acura driving well below the speed limit. He ran a search, learned the car
was stolen, and made a traffic stop. Once other officers arrived, Ibarra
ordered the driver to exit the car. Picasso, the driver and sole occupant of the
car, was compliant.

2     We have partially redacted the names of witnesses in the interest of
privacy.
                                        2
      During an inventory search of the Acura, the officers found a backpack
with personal identifying information that did not belong to Picasso. The
information consisted of pieces of mail for six people and one vehicle
registration for a 1992 Honda, which was registered to Rafael V. The Acura
had a key in the ignition, which appeared to Ibarra to be a generic key that
could be copied or created, but it was not shaved down.
      When Picasso was searched, the officer found one single ammunition on
his person, a .44 magnum caliber Remington. He also found multiple
keyrings and keys, including an Audi key and a mailbox key.
      On September 26, 2022, D.S. went to work in her white 2000
Honda CR-V. At about 6:00 a.m. the next day, she found that her car was
gone and she still had the keys. D.S. got the car back two or three weeks
later, but it was filthy and parts were missing.
      At around 9:00 p.m. on September 28, 2022, E.M. parked his silver
2000 Honda CR-V outside his brother’s residence. At 4:00 a.m. on
September 29, 2023, he found the car was missing, and he still had the key in
his possession. He did not know Picasso or give him permission to take or
drive his car or possess any of his information. When E.M. received the car
back, it was in bad condition, would not run, was missing some parts, had
syringes in it, and had been painted.
      On October 2, 2022, M.H. was approaching her 2008 Chevrolet Malibu
while carrying her 7-month-old son when she saw Picasso inside and a
woman in the driver’s seat of a silver Honda CR-V about 30 feet away
excessively honking at him. Picasso then got out of the Malibu and said he
thought the Malibu was his friend’s car. A verbal altercation ensued between
M.H. and Picasso.

                                        3
      Picasso told M.H. he had her backpack, then went to the Honda and got
the backpack. M.H. testified that it was actually her son’s diaper bag. They
argued and M.H. photographed Picasso and called the police.
      M.H. saw her car diagnostic reader on the front passenger seat in the
Honda CR-V and took it back. After she called the police, M.H. discovered
that her Versace prescription sunglasses and her Michael Kors watch that
were in the car were also missing. At some point, Picasso got into the
Honda CR-V with the female driver and they drove off together.
      On October 5, 2022, M.M. was at home when he noticed a white
Honda CR-V pull up across the street. He saw a male driver and female
passenger inside. The man and woman got out of the car and both had large
backpacks on. They walked down the block, then quickly turned and went
into a condemned, abandoned house.
      Officers Fernandez and Kafkas soon arrived on the scene to investigate
a stolen white Honda CR-V. Fernandez located the vehicle when they
arrived. Kafkas was notified that the suspects were inside a house.
      Officers ordered the suspects out of the house and within five minutes,
a woman came out of the house followed by Picasso. Picasso was detained
and the officers conducted a curbside lineup. M.M. identified Picasso as the
driver of the car.
      Officer Fernandez searched Picasso and his backpack. He found a
bump key, which is a key that is shaved down and can pick locks.
      Around 11:00 p.m. on October 29, 2022, L.C. parked his work truck, a
GMC Yukon, in front of his house. About 20 minutes later, he and his
girlfriend, O.S., discovered the vehicle was gone. L.C. still had both sets of
keys. O.S. had left her wallet with her identification and cards inside the
Yukon.

                                        4
      O.S. called the non-emergency police number to report it and was put
on hold. L.C. called his boss and told him about the vehicle. The vehicle had
a GPS locator and L.C.’s boss told him the vehicle was nearby, so L.C. and
O.S. got into another vehicle and went looking for it. They drove to a gas
station and located the vehicle.
      L.C. blocked the exit, jumped out of the car and saw a woman in the
Yukon driver’s seat shift over to the passenger seat. L.C. and O.S. saw
Picasso standing by the back of the vehicle with a backpack on. O.S. went to
the passenger side and asked the woman sitting in the passenger seat what
she was doing in their vehicle.
      L.C. ran to the Yukon and took the key from the ignition. The key was
a shaved master key. Everything was rummaged through in the Yukon. L.C.
asked Picasso if he took the vehicle and if he was the one driving; Picasso
said no.
      The woman jumped out of the Yukon with O.S.’s purse and O.S. went
after her. The two women were screaming and fighting. Everything in O.S.’s
purse went flying out. O.S. got her purse with credit cards back, and the
other woman then kept running. L.C. was picking things up that came from
the purse and saw Picasso had stuff in his hands, including a credit card.
L.C. asked what he was doing with it; Picasso said it was not his and handed
it to L.C.
      O.S. got the empty wallet back from the woman, then saw Picasso with
cards from the wallet, including O.S.’s debit card, driver’s license, Medicaid
and insurance cards and L.C.’s credit card. O.S. testified that she snatched
the cards from him.
      Officers Ryan and Russ received a radio call about a stolen blue GMC
Yukon in progress at a gas station, and they responded. When they arrived

                                       5
at the gas station, Ryan saw Picasso between the gas pump and the open
driver’s door. The officers turned on their emergency lights, and Picasso
started to walk away. Two people at the gas station, L.C. and O.S., flagged
the officers down and directed them toward Picasso. The officers tried to get
Picasso to stop by announcing themselves as police, but he kept walking
away. They were able to walk up and place him in handcuffs without
incident.
      During a search of the vehicle, Officer Ryan found shaved keys. The
officers found other keys and various tools such as screwdrivers and pliers in
the backpack Picasso was carrying. Picasso also had a AAA card for E.M.
(the owner of the silver 2000 Honda CR-V), a paycheck dated from 2009 for
G.G., mail for G.G., a paycheck for C.C., a pay stub for R.F., an earnings
statement for T.Q., a debit or credit card for F.S., a credit card application for
K.V., a $400 check to someone with the last name Schamel, a Covid
vaccination card and health insurance card for O.S., a multi tool, a couple of
earrings, miscellaneous mail, and a list of individuals’ names and phone
numbers.
                                 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 one possible issue which was considered in evaluating the
potential merits of this appeal: Whether there was sufficient evidence to
support the conviction for count 1 (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)).
      We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders.
We have not discovered any arguable issues for reversal on appeal.
Competent counsel has represented Picasso on this appeal.

                                        6
                             DISPOSITION
     The judgment is affirmed.

                                           HUFFMAN, J.

WE CONCUR:

McCONNELL, P. J.

CASTILLO, J.

                                  7