People v. Cole CA2/3
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Los Angeles County · No. 25SFCF01478
- Trial judge
- David W. Stuart
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- criminal
- Panel
- Annette A. Adams (author), Mark K. Hanasono
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion
Filed 8/26/26 P. v. Cole CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE
THE PEOPLE, B351611
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 25SFCF01478) v.
LOGAN COLE,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David W. Stuart, Judge. Affirmed. Naomi L. Svensson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗ A jury found Logan Raymond Cole guilty of one count of second degree robbery. The trial court imposed a mid-term sentence of three years in state prison. Cole appealed. His appellate counsel has asked us to conduct an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We have done so and affirm the trial court judgment. The evidence at trial established that on July 22, 2025, Cole entered a T.J. Maxx store in Chatsworth. He was carrying a shopping bag. Loss prevention officer Elvis Betancourt saw Cole moving around the store, placing items in a shopping cart. Betancourt observed as Cole placed a portable charger in his shopping bag, as well as nail clippers, and an item of clothing. Betancourt communicated with his partner that day, Eric Zamora, so that Zamora could begin watching Cole on the store cameras. Betancourt later asked Zamora to go to the front outside area of the store. As Betancourt watched, Cole walked past the cash registers and left the store with his shopping bag. The two loss prevention officers approached Cole. Betancourt asked Cole to return the store merchandise that was in the shopping bag. Betancourt grabbed the bag and saw the stolen items inside. Cole gave Betancourt the portable charger, but when Betancourt said there was more stolen merchandise in the bag, Cole tried to pull the bag out of Betancourt’s hand, leading to a “push and pull.” Betancourt said he needed the store merchandise back. Cole pulled harder, yanked the bag out of Betancourt’s hand, and became “verbally aggressive.” Cole’s forceful yank of the bag hurt Betancourt’s arm. The loss prevention officers “disengaged” and called the police. Security cameras had recorded Cole in the store. Footage presented to the jury showed Cole putting the portable charger in 2 his shopping bag and, later, walking out of the store. However, a camera that should have been recording the front outside area of the store was not working at the time of the incident. The prosecution had no clear video of the altercation at the front of the store. The jury found Cole guilty of one count of second degree robbery. The court imposed a middle term sentence of three years. Cole timely appealed. Court-appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief that raised no issues and asked this court to independently review the record pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436. We directed appellate counsel to send Cole the record and a copy of the opening brief. We also advised that within 30 days of the date of the notice, Cole could submit a supplemental brief or letter stating any ground for an appeal, contentions, or arguments he wished this court to consider. Appellate counsel submitted a declaration stating that counsel had informed Cole of his right to file a supplemental brief and had sent him the appellate record. Cole did not file a supplemental brief. We have independently examined the record on appeal and are satisfied that no arguable issues exist, and Cole’s attorney has complied with the responsibilities of counsel. (People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 125–126; Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441–442.)
3 DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS ADAMS, P. J.
We concur:
HANASONO, J.
ASHWORTH, J.* * Retired Judge of the El Dorado Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
Cites, in this corpus
- People v. Kelly S133114 · 2006-11-27
- People v. Wende Crim. 20851 · 1979-10-12