IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)
July 7, 2011
THE PEOPLE, PLAINTIFF AND RESPONDENT,
MANUEL ALVARADO-GUERRERO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.
Super. Ct. No. 08F08406
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mauro J.
P. v. Alvarado-Guerrero CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
Appointed counsel for defendant Manuel Alvarado-Guerrero asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We find no arguable error and no issue regarding presentence credit. We will affirm the judgment.
On October 8, 2008, defendant and some relatives gathered outside their apartment and drank beer. Victim Rodolfo Nunez joined the gathering.
Later that evening, Nunez appeared on the porch outside the apartment defendant shared with his wife, her sister, and the sister's husband Juan Vargas. Nunez asked to use Vargas's phone and took the phone outside. Vargas told Nunez not to converse too long because the phone belonged to his employer. When Nunez kept talking on the phone, Vargas demanded that he return it. Nunez told Vargas to wait. Vargas elbowed and kicked Nunez and recovered the phone.
Vargas reentered the apartment, followed by Nunez. Vargas ordered Nunez to leave. When Nunez refused, Vargas pointed a pistol at him. Defendant and Vargas chased Nunez away, but Nunez warned that he would be back. Nunez ran back to the liquor store.
Defendant and Vargas discussed Nunez. At defendant's suggestion they drove to the liquor store, watched Nunez for a while, and then returned to the apartment. Defendant told Vargas he was going out again to look for Nunez. Defendant had a kitchen knife in his hand.
When defendant returned to the apartment he was covered in blood. One of his hands was swollen at the knuckles and the fingers were lacerated. Defendant told Vargas he "killed a guy." Vargas knew he meant Nunez. Defendant cleaned himself and changed clothes.
The next morning, defendant explained to Vargas how he found Nunez and how, after stabbing Nunez in the neck, they fought until he stabbed Nunez in the stomach and kicked him. Defendant told Vargas that he used the kitchen knife and threw it away before he returned to the apartment.
Later that morning defendant told Enrique Cabrera that he killed Nunez. Defendant said he approached Nunez, cut his "main vein," and stabbed Nunez in the stomach. Nunez begged defendant to stop, but defendant continued to stab him. Then he kicked Nunez.
Anthony Fletcher found Nunez's body near a dumpster. Police found blood spray and additional blood on the ground near the body. Forensic examination of the body showed numerous sharp force injuries to the back, neck, and head, and multiple blunt force injuries to the head.
Three days after the murder, police canvassed the apartment complex. Defendant was arrested without incident at the apartment. Blood found on the door of defendant's apartment was matched to Nunez and defendant. Blood found on defendant's boot was matched to Nunez.
Defendant testified that he intended to fight with Nunez and to "have him go away." Defendant did not want to kill him. Defendant claimed Nunez threw himself on defendant, and they fought. Defendant stabbed Nunez because Nunez had an unknown object in his hand. The knife fell, and then Nunez fell "because he didn't have anymore strength." Defendant kicked Nunez a few times. He did not think Nunez was dead. Defendant ran back to the apartment. He did not recall what he had done with the knife. When he got home, he told Vargas what had happened. He told his daughter that he had fought with Nunez and believed that he had killed him. Defendant cleaned himself, tried to clean his boots, and threw away his bloody clothing. Defendant testified that he takes responsibility for what happened.
A jury convicted defendant of first degree murder (Pen. Code,*fn1 §§ 187, subd. (a), 189) and found that he personally used a knife in the commission of the offense (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for 25 years to life for the murder plus one year for the knife enhancement. The trial court awarded 756 days of custody credit and zero days of conduct credit.*fn2 In addition, the trial court ordered defendant to pay a $10,000 restitution fine (§ 1202.4),*fn3 a $10,000 restitution fine suspended unless parole is revoked (§ 1202.45), a $40 court security fee (§ 1465.8), and a $30 court facilities assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373).
We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. Having undertaken an
examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: HULL Acting P. J. ROBIE J.