P. v.Richards CA5 ( 2015 )


Menu:
  • Filed 10/27/15 P. v.Richards CA5
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
    FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
    THE PEOPLE,
    F068894
    Plaintiff and Respondent,
    (Super. Ct. No. F012904565)
    v.
    JAMES DEMARCO RICHARDS,                                                                  OPINION
    Defendant and Appellant.
    THE COURT*
    APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. John F. Vogt,
    Judge.
    Diane E. Berley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
    Appellant.
    Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney
    General, Louis M. Vasquez, Amanda D. Cary and Lewis A. Martinez, Deputy Attorneys
    General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    -ooOoo-
    *        Before Levy, Acting P.J., Detjen, J. and Franson, J.
    Defendant James DeMarco Richards was convicted by jury trial of several counts
    of sex offenses and two counts of dissuading a witness by force or threat. On appeal, he
    contends, and the People concede, that the weapon use enhancements attached to the
    two counts of dissuading a witness by force or threat were improper. We will strike the
    two enhancements, vacate the sentence, and remand for resentencing.
    BACKGROUND
    In the original information, defendant was charged with six counts of various
    sex offenses and, in counts 5 and 8, two counts of second degree robbery (Pen. Code,
    § 211).1 Two types of weapon use allegations were charged in connection with the
    crimes. Connected to each sex offense was an allegation that defendant used a deadly
    weapon, a knife, pursuant to section 12022.3, subdivision (a)—a weapon use
    enhancement specific to certain sex offenses.2 Connected to both counts 5 and 8 was an
    allegation that defendant personally used a deadly or dangerous weapon, a knife, pursuant
    to section 12022, subdivision (b)(1)—a weapon use enhancement applicable to felony
    offenses.3
    In the first amended information, count 8 was changed from robbery to dissuading
    a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)). For an unknown reason, the weapon
    use allegation connected to it was changed from a section 12022, subdivision (b)(1)
    felony allegation to a section 12022.3, subdivision (a) sex offense allegation.
    1      All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.
    2      Section 12022.3, subdivision (a) provides: “For each violation of Section 220
    involving a specified sexual offense, or for each violation or attempted violation of
    Section 261, 262, 264.1, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, and in addition to the sentence provided,
    any person shall receive the following: [¶] (a) A 3-, 4-, or 10-year enhancement if the
    person uses a firearm or a deadly weapon in the commission of the violation.”
    3     Section 12022, subdivision (b)(1) provides: “A person who personally uses a
    deadly or dangerous weapon in the commission of a felony or attempted felony shall be
    punished by an additional and consecutive term of imprisonment in the state prison for
    one year, unless use of a deadly or dangerous weapon is an element of that offense.”
    2.
    In the third amended information, count 5 was also changed from robbery to
    dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)).4 The prosecutor informed
    the court that count 5’s weapon allegation should also be changed from a section 12022,
    subdivision (b)(1) allegation to a section 12022.3, subdivision (a) allegation, and that all
    of the counts should have the same section 12022.3, subdivision (a) weapon use
    allegation. The court amended the information as requested.
    The jurors were instructed on the weapon use allegations with CALCRIM
    No. 3145, which is expressly applicable to weapon use allegations under sections 667.61,
    subdivision (e)(3), 1192.7, subdivision (c)(23), 12022, subdivision (b)(1) and (2), and
    12022.3.
    On the verdict forms for all counts, the jurors found true the allegation that
    defendant personally used a deadly weapon, to wit, a knife.5
    The trial court sentenced defendant to two consecutive 25-year-to-life sentences,
    plus a determinate term of 34 years. On counts 5 and 8, specifically, the court enhanced
    the terms by four years each, pursuant to section 12022.3, subdivision (a).
    DISCUSSION
    Defendant contends the trial court erred in enhancing counts 5 and 8 with the four-
    year weapon use enhancement applicable to sex offenses under section 12022.3,
    subdivision (a). The People concede, but note that because the jury made the specific
    finding that defendant personally used a deadly weapon in the commission of the offense,
    4      The record does not contain a second amended information.
    5      We note that all but one verdict form cited section 12022.3, subdivision (a), as
    follows: “defendant … in the commission of the above count did … personally use a
    deadly weapon, to wit: KNIFE, within the meaning of VIOLATION OF THE PENAL
    CODE SECTION 12022.3(a), a felony, as charged in the Third Amended Information
    filed herein.” Whereas, on the verdict form for count 3, a sex offense, the allegation
    stated only the following: “defendant … in the commission of the above count did …
    personally use a deadly weapon, to wit: KNIFE.”
    3.
    he should be resentenced with the appropriate weapon use enhancement under
    section 12022, subdivision (b)(1). We agree that the current four-year enhancements
    should be stricken and the matter remanded for resentencing on counts 5 and 8 because
    the section 12022.3, subdivision (a) weapon use allegations were not applicable to the
    charges of dissuading a witness pursuant to section 136.1, subdivision (c)(1).
    DISPOSITION
    The judgments of conviction are affirmed. The four-year section 12022.3,
    subdivision (a) weapon use enhancements on counts 5 and 8 are stricken. The sentence is
    vacated and the matter remanded to the trial court for resentencing. The court is directed
    to forward certified copies of the amended abstract and minute order to the appropriate
    entities.
    4.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: F068894

Filed Date: 10/27/2015

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/17/2021