People v. Mora CA2/4

Opinion

Filed 7/3/25 P. v. Mora CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B333497

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. PA093862) v.

NICHOLAS MORA,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Daniel B. Feldstern, Judge. Affirmed. Vanessa Place, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Defendant Nicholas Mora was charged by amended information with nine counts of lewd acts upon a child under the age of 14 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)), one count of lewd acts upon a child aged 14 or 15 (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (c)(1)), and one count of continuous sexual abuse (Pen. Code, § 288.5, subd. (a)). Aggravating factors were alleged on all counts under California Rules of Court, rules 4.421(a)(3) (particularly vulnerable victim), 4.421(a)(8) (planning and sophistication in carrying out the crime), and 4.421(a)(11) (defendant took advantage of a position of trust or confidence to commit the crime). On August 2, 2023, a jury found defendant guilty on all charges. Defendant waived his jury trial right on the aggravating factors and the trial court subsequently found the factors true as alleged. Defendant was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 34 years, and 8 months. Defendant timely appealed. After reviewing the record, defendant’s court-appointed counsel filed an opening brief requesting that this court independently review the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441 (Wende). On April 24, 2024, we informed defendant that he had 30 days to submit a supplemental brief or letter stating any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. At defendant’s request, his deadline to file a supplemental brief was continued four times to January 15, 2025. To date, we have received no supplemental brief or letter from defendant. We have reviewed the record and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist. By virtue of counsel’s compliance with the Wende procedure and our examination of the record, the defendant has received adequate and effective appellate review of the judgment entered against him. (Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 278; People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 112–113.)

2 DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS ZUKIN, P. J.

WE CONCUR:

COLLINS, J.

MORI, J.