People v. Martinez CA2/6

Opinion

Filed 2/29/24 P. v. Martinez CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B327515 (Super. Ct. No. VA151669) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

JUAN MARTINEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found Juan Martinez guilty of five counts of a forcible lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 in violation of Penal Code1 section 288, subdivision (b)(1) (counts 1-5); and three counts of a lewd act upon a child under the age of 14 in violation of section 288, subdivision (a) (counts 6-8). The jury also found as to each count pursuant to section 667.61, subdivisions (e)(4) and (j)(2), that the offenses were committed against multiple victims under the age of 14.

1 All references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise

indicated. Martinez waived his right to a jury trial on aggravating factors in California Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(1), (3), (8), and (11), that each offense involved great violence, great bodily harm, threat of great bodily harm, or other acts disclosing a high degree of cruelty; that each victim was particularly vulnerable; and that each offense indicated planning, sophistication, and professionalism. The trial court found the aggravating factors to be true. The trial court sentenced Martinez to eight consecutive 25-years-to-life terms, for a total of 200 years to life. We appointed counsel to represent Martinez in this appeal. After examining the record, counsel filed a brief raising no issues. On November 30, 2023, we advised Martinez by mail that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues that he wished to raise on appeal. We received no reply. We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Martinez’s attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.) The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

GILBERT, P. J.

We concur:

YEGAN, J. BALTODANO, J.

2 Deborah S. Brazil, Judge

Superior Court County of Los Angeles

______________________________

Alice Newman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.