Filed 6/26/25 P. v. Morales CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D084780 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. SCE418775) JARO MORALES, Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Daniel G. Lamborn, Judge. Affirmed.

Laura Vavakin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Jaro Morales appeals from his domestic violence conviction. His appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief raising no arguable issues pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders); Morales did not file a supplemental brief on his own behalf. Our independent review confirms there are no arguable issues on appeal. We therefore affirm the conviction.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In July of 2023, Morales attacked his wife, E.V., hitting her numerous times and momentarily strangling her with her purse strap. E.V. suffered a broken nose, a concussion, bleeding from her ear, and facial swelling that sealed her left eye. According to E.V., Morales also threatened to kill her and her family.

The San Diego District Attorney’s Office charged Morales with corporal injury to a spouse (Pen. Code,1 § 273.5, subd. (a); count 1), alleging that he inflicted great bodily injury during the offense (§ 12022.7, subd. (e)), and making a criminal threat (§ 422; count 2). At his 2024 trial, the jury found Morales guilty of count 1, determining that he personally inflicted great bodily injury, but not guilty of count 2.

Regarding aggravating circumstances, Morales admitted that he committed the offense while on probation, and the trial court found not true that his convictions were numerous and increasing in seriousness. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.41(b)(2) & (4).) The trial court sentenced Morales to seven years in prison. Despite Morales’s history of childhood trauma, the trial court selected the midterm of three years for corporal injury to a spouse, finding the aggravating factors outweighed the mitigating ones. The trial court imposed the midterm of four years for the great bodily injury, declining to dismiss that enhancement based on danger to public safety.

Morales filed a timely notice of appeal. His appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief raising no issues and asking us to review the record for error under Wende and Anders. To assist us in our independent review, counsel identified the following potential errors by the trial court: (1)

1 All undesignated section references are to the Penal Code. declining to dismiss the great bodily injury enhancement; (2) not imposing the lower term for the corporal injury to a spouse; (3) failing to instruct the jury on unanimity and the lesser included offense of battery; and (4) admitting Morales’s prior statements and domestic abuse, E.V.’s 911 call, and a responding officer’s body-worn camera footage. Counsel also suggests that we assess whether trial counsel was ineffective regarding the jury’s affirmation of the verdict.

Morales has not filed a supplemental brief despite his counsel and this court informing him of his right to do so. DISCUSSION We have reviewed the entire record as required by Wende and Anders, and considered the issues identified by Morales’s counsel. We find no arguable issue that would result in a reversal or modification of the judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment. Competent counsel has represented Morales on this appeal.

DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed.

RUBIN, J.

WE CONCUR:

McCONNELL, P. J.

CASTILLO, J.