People v. Sarreshteh CA4/1

Filed 10/15/24 P. v. Sarreshteh CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D081561

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD289954 )

TRAVIS FEREYDOUN SARRESHTEH,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Evan P. Kirvin, Judge. Affirmed. Robert L.S. Angres, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Arlene A. Sevidal, Paige B. Hazard, and James M. Toohey, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I. INTRODUCTION

Travis Fereydoun Sarreshteh appeals from his ten-count conviction, challenging only the trial court’s imposition of the upper term for a firearm enhancement on count 6. He claims the aggravating circumstances upon which that upper term was based applied to the underlying assault offense but not to the enhancement. Finding Sarreshteh’s claim forfeited, we affirm the judgment.

II. BACKGROUND

After Sarreshteh went on a shooting spree in Downtown San Diego in

2021, a jury convicted him of one count of first degree murder (Pen. Code,1 § 187, subd. (a); count 1), four counts of attempted first degree murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); counts 2–5), and one count of assault with a semiautomatic firearm (§ 245, subd. (b); count 6). The jury found that Sarreshteh personally and intentionally discharged a firearm proximately causing death in count 1 (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)), personally and intentionally discharged a firearm proximately causing great bodily injury in counts 2 through 5 (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)), and personally used a firearm (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)) inflicting great bodily injury in count 6 (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). The jury found true five aggravating factors regarding counts 2 through 6. Those findings were stated for count 6 as follows: “Verdict, Count 6: And we further find the additional factors of, one, vulnerable victim, to be true; two, weapons arming, to be true; three, crimes carried out with planning, sophistication, professionalism, to be true; four, crime of great violence, cruelty, viciousness and callousness, to be true; five, Defendant engaged in violent conduct indicating danger to society, to be true.”