Court Opinion

ID: 9899962
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-18 00:03:36.67417+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:20:57.295022
License: Public Domain

Filed 11/17/23 P. v. Villa CA2/2
   NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE,                                                    B328602

         Plaintiff and Respondent,                             (Los Angeles County
                                                               Super. Ct. No. LA093726)
         v.

USBALDO VILLA,

         Defendant and Appellant.

         THE COURT:

      Usbaldo Villa (defendant) appeals his conviction for arson
following a bench trial. Appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant
to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We affirm.
      In the early morning hours of October 15, 2020,
surveillance footage from security cameras monitoring the
parking lot of a commercial building showed defendant
rummaging in a shopping cart and walking to the rear of the
building. The video footage then showed defendant departing the
area with the shopping cart moments before a fire began at the
rear of the building. The interior and exterior of the building
were damaged “substantially.” Approximately two weeks later,
when questioned by an investigator from the Los Angeles City
Fire Department, defendant stated that he “lit a fire behind the
building” using a “lighter.”
       In March 2021, the People charged defendant with one
count of arson of a structure (Pen. Code, § 451, subd. (c)).1 In
July 2021, the court suspended criminal proceedings and placed
defendant on section 1001.36 mental health diversion. Defendant
left his assigned residential programs on two occasions—in
August 2021 and in June 2022. In July 2022, the trial court
terminated defendant’s section 1001.36 diversion when no
“suitable program” would accept him.
       Defendant waived his right to a jury trial. In November
2022, the court found defendant guilty of violating section 451,
subdivision (c), sentenced him to the low term of two years in
prison, and ordered him to register as an arson offender pursuant
to section 457.1.
       Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal.
       We appointed appellate counsel for defendant. Citing
Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436, counsel filed an opening brief
setting out the procedural history of this case and a declaration
indicating that counsel “reviewed the entire record,” had found no
“arguable issues” on appeal and had informed defendant of his
right “to file a supplemental brief,” and asking this court to

1     All further statutory references are to the Penal Code
unless otherwise indicated.

                                2
independently review the record. Defendant was also advised by
this court of the opportunity to file a supplemental brief; he
filed no brief. We have examined the entire record and are
satisfied that counsel has complied with counsel's responsibilities
and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40
Cal.4th 106, 110-111; Wende, at p. 441.)
                         DISPOSITION
       The judgment is affirmed.
       NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS.

——————————————————————————————
LUI, P. J., ASHMANN-GERST, J., HOFFSTADT, J.

                                 3