People v. Huerta CA2/5


Filed 1/13/22 P. v. Huerta CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE THE PEOPLE, B309716 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. BA206719/BA400409) v. FRANCISCO HUERTA, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William C. Ryan, Judge. Affirmed. Christopher Lionel Haberman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent. __________________________ Francisco Huerta appeals from orders denying his Penal Code section 1473.7, subdivision (a)(2) motions to vacate convictions and sentences for spousal abuse and corporal injury to a child’s parent.1 His appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Serrano (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 496 (Serrano), raising no issues. Huerta filed a supplemental brief arguing that newly discovered evidence established his actual innocence. Because the new evidence did not prove actual innocence, we affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Spousal Abuse Conviction in 2001 On September 3, 2000, police arrested Huerta after he had an altercation with Laura Torres, the mother of his child.2 The People charged him with assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)) and dissuading a witness (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)). At the September 18, 2000 preliminary hearing, a police officer testified that in responding to Torres’s call for help, he encountered a distraught Torres with a torn blouse. Torres told him that Huerta came to her home, demanded to take their infant daughter, approached her with a knife, pushed her, cut her blouse with the knife saying it was “a slut shirt,” and then exited with the baby. Torres told the officer that on his way out, Huerta ripped the phone off the wall. The officer testified that Torres’s 1 All further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. Section 1473.7, subdivision (a)(2) allows convictions to be vacated where there is newly discovered evidence of actual innocence. 2 At this point in time, Huerta had one child with Torres. They later had a second child. 2 13-year-old son reported Huerta entered the home and cut the microwave and refrigerator power cords. The son told the officer that he followed Huerta to Torres’s room and watched Huerta cut Torres’s blouse with a knife and take the baby. The officer testified he observed that Torres’s telephone was ripped from the wall and that his partner noted the microwave and refrigerator power cords were severed. At the preliminary hearing, both Torres and her son denied the statements they had made to the police, i.e. that Huerta had a knife, threatened Torres, cut her blouse while she was wearing it, or damaged power and phone cords. Torres …

Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals