People v. Stricklin CA3

Filed 8/28/24 P. v. Stricklin CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

THE PEOPLE, C098488

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 22CF04103, 22CF04186, 22CF04193, v. 22CF04198)

MAGDALENA DANIELLE STRICKLIN,

Defendant and Appellant.

To resolve four separate criminal matters, defendant Magdalena Danielle Stricklin stipulated to an aggregate 10-year four-month split prison term. Her plea agreement included a stipulated upper-term sentence on one of her convictions and provided that she would serve a portion of her sentence in the county jail and the remainder on mandatory supervision. After being released on mandatory supervision, she admitted multiple violations of the terms of her release. The trial court terminated mandatory supervision and ordered her to serve the remainder of her sentence in county jail. On appeal, Stricklin challenges the upper-term sentence under Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 731, § 1.3) (Senate Bill 567). That law amended Penal Code section 1170 to impose certain requirements before a trial court may impose

1

an upper term. 1 We conclude that Stricklin has forfeited her challenge because she failed to raise it with the trial court when it terminated mandatory supervision and ordered her back into custody, even though Senate Bill 567 was in effect at that time. We therefore affirm. BACKGROUND This appeal arises from four different criminal matters that began in Sutter County and were later transferred to Butte County. I. The first two matters involve criminal charges filed against Stricklin in April 2020. On April 1, 2020, in Butte County case No. 22CF04103 (Sutter County case No. CRF20- 0863), the People charged Stricklin with receiving a stolen motor vehicle (§ 496d, subd. (a); count 1) and bringing contraband into a jail (§ 4573, subd. (a); count 2). A week later, she entered a conditional no contest plea to count 1 pursuant to People v. West (1970) 3 Cal.3d 595 in exchange for a stipulated term of probation with 45 days in county jail. The court dismissed count 2 with a waiver under People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754. Stricklin was released on her own recognizance pending sentencing. Less than a week later, on April 14, 2020, Stricklin was charged in Butte County case No. 22CF04186 (Sutter County case No. CRF20-0961) with vehicle theft (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a); count 1), possession of a tear gas weapon (§ 22810, subd. (a); count 2), driving under the influence of a drug (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (f); count 3), possession of methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a); count 4), and possession of controlled substance paraphernalia (Health & Saf. Code, § 11364, subd. (a); count 5). With respect to count 1, the prosecution alleged an on-bail enhancement. (§ 12022.1.)