People v. Wesson CA5 ( 2024 )

Filed 6/27/24 P. v. Wesson 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,
F086913
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. BF188991A)
v.
DARNELL WESSON, JR., OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT*
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Judith K.
Dulcich, Judge.
Ross Thomas, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
-ooOoo-
* Before Hill, P. J., Smith, J. and Snauffer, J.
STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY
This appeal is from a judgment of conviction following a jury trial which disposed
of all issues between the parties and is authorized by Penal Code section 1237.1
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
On March 8, 2022, an information was filed in Kern County Superior Court
charging Wesson with felony arson (§ 451, subd. (d); count 1); felony possession or use
of a flammable or combustible substance (§ 453, subd. (a); count 2); misdemeanor failure
to register as an arson offender (§ 457.1; count 3); and misdemeanor resisting a peace
officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1); count 4). It was alleged in counts 1 and 2 that Wesson had
previously suffered a serious felony conviction within the meaning of section 667,
subdivisions (c)-(j) and section 1170.12, subdivisions (a) through (e). It was alleged in
count 1 that Wesson had previously suffered an arson conviction within the meaning of
section 451.1, subdivision (a)(1). It was also alleged in count 1 that Wesson had
previously suffered a serious felony conviction within the meaning of section 667,
subdivision (a). He pleaded not guilty to the charges and denied the allegations on
March 14, 2022.
On March 1, 2023, Wesson exercised his right to represent himself at trial.
Wesson’s jury trial commenced on August 17, 2023. During trial, Wesson called no
witnesses and chose not to testify on his own behalf.
At the outset of the proceeding, the court bifurcated trial on the prior conviction
allegations. The jury returned its verdicts on August 23, 2023, finding Wesson guilty on
all counts. Thereafter, it found he had previously suffered the serious felony conviction
1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated.
2.
alleged pursuant to section 667, subdivision (a), section 667, subdivisions (c)- (j), and
section 1170.12, subdivisions (a)-(e).
On September 26, 2023, Wesson was sentenced to state prison for an aggregate
term of 16 years. Specifically, the trial court imposed the aggravated term of three years
on count 1 and then doubled it to six years in accordance with section 667,
subdivision (e)(1) and section 1170.12, subdivision (c)(1). Five-year enhancements were
imposed under section 451.1 and section 667, subdivision (a), resulting in an additional
10 years. A term of six years was imposed on count 2 and then stayed pursuant to
section 654.2 One-year county jail terms were imposed on counts 3 and 4 and ordered to
run concurrent to count 1.
On September 26, 2023, Wesson filed a timely notice of appeal.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
On February 14, 2022, surveillance cameras at a gas station located on Stockdale
Highway captured Wesson collecting a cardboard box and items from a trash can.
Thereafter, he was observed starting a small fire which discolored the paint on an
adjacent PG&E vault.
Members of the Bakersfield Fire Department responded to the scene and
extinguished the fire. One of the firefighters who arrived there was Captain Jonathan
Wegis. Wearing his department uniform, Wegis followed Wesson who was walking
away from him. Wesson refused to stop and instead took off running. Wegis ordered
Wesson to stop multiple times. Moments later, Wesson was apprehended by another
2 The trial court imposed the same sentence on count 2 as it did on count 1
(aggravated term of three years, doubled to six), then stayed the sentence on count 2
pursuant to section 654. We will order the abstract of judgment to be corrected in our
disposition. (See, People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 185 [clerical errors in
abstract of judgment may be ordered corrected at any time]; see also People v. Burke
(2023) 89 Cal.App.5th 237, 244 [ordering correction of clerical errors in abstract of
judgment following Wende review].)
3.
member of the department, Captain Bryce Patterson. After being read his Miranda3
rights, Wesson admitted to Wegis that he started the fire. When searched, Wesson was
found in possession of three lighters which were considered to be incendiary devices.
Wesson was familiar to Patterson. The captain had detained Wesson when
investigating a fire on February 9, 2021. When questioned, Wesson admitted to starting
two fires at that time. He was subsequently convicted of arson for those two fires and
thereafter failed to register as an arsonist as required by law.
APPELLATE COURT REVIEW
Wesson’s appointed appellate counsel has filed an opening brief that summarizes
the pertinent facts, raises no issues, and requests this court to review the record
independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) The opening brief also
includes the declaration of appellate counsel indicating Wesson was advised he could file
his own brief with this court. By letter on May 20, 2024, we invited Wesson to submit
additional briefing.
In response to our invitation, Wesson filed a supplemental letter brief on June 13,
2024, which we have read and considered. However, he presents no issues that would
warrant relief on appeal.
Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no evidence of
ineffective assistance of counsel or any other arguable error that would result in a
disposition more favorable to Wesson.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed. The trial court is directed to correct the abstract of
judgment to reflect that a six year term was imposed on count 2, then stayed pursuant to
section 654. The corrected abstract should be forwarded to all appropriate parties.
3 Miranda v. Arizona (1966) 384 U.S. 436.
4.