People v. Salmeron CA2/6

Filed 7/22/24 P. v. Salmeron CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B329379 (Super. Ct. No. KA125847) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

JAVIER SANCHEZ- SALMERON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Javier Sanchez-Salmeron appeals his sentence after a jury found him guilty on three counts of lewd act upon a child under the age of 14. (Pen. Code, § 288, subd. (a)).1 The trial court found true aggravating factors that the victim was particularly vulnerable, and that appellant took advantage of a position of trust and confidence to commit the offenses. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(3), (11).) It sentenced him to an aggregate term of 12 years in prison: the high term of eight years on the first count

1 Unlabeled statutory cites are to the Penal Code.

and consecutive terms of two years (one-third the middle term of six years) on the other two counts. Appellant contends the trial court abused its discretion when: (1) it found the aggravating factors true and sentenced him to the high term on count 1, and (2) it denied his request to continue sentencing. We will affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Appellant is victim D.P.’s godfather. D.P. considered him a “father-like” figure when she was a child. She would often visit his house and stay overnight. He molested her several times between the ages of 9 and 12. D.P. disclosed the abuse to her mother at age 13 after she began feeling suicidal and performing poorly in school. Appellant told police he did not remember touching her but acknowledged he might have “unintentionally” done so while drunk. Prosecutors charged appellant with four counts of molestation: three involving D.P. and one involving her sister, P.P. The jury found him guilty on the three counts involving D.P. but not guilty on the count involving P.P. Appellant waived his right to a jury trial on the aggravating factors. The trial court found them true. A recently assigned public defender appeared for appellant at sentencing. She moved for a new trial on the aggravating factors and requested a continuance to “request and review the trial transcripts” so she could “make any appropriate arguments for sentencing.” The trial court denied the motion and sentenced appellant. It stated: “I’ll note the defendant previously waived jury on aggravating circumstances and the court, based on the evidence introduced in trial and with argument from attorneys on each side, made findings in that regard. So that will be denied.”