People v. Leaton-Gomez CA1/1

Filed 10/16/24 P. v. Leaton-Gomez CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A168632 v. RICO RICHARD LEATON-GOMEZ, (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR-757135-1) Defendant and Appellant.

After a jury convicted defendant Rico Richard Leaton-Gomez of carjacking and assault, he filed a combined motion to dismiss his prior strike conviction pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero), and to dismiss the sentencing enhancements pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1385, subdivision (c) (hereafter section 1385(c)). The trial court denied his motion and sentenced him to 26 years in prison. On appeal, defendant argues the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion. We affirm. I. BACKGROUND In October 2022, 67-year-old John Doe was seated in his parked truck when defendant walked up to him and asked a question using Spanish and

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

English words. Doe did not understand defendant, and he replied, “no comprende.” Defendant walked away but then he returned and said something about Doe’s truck, to which Doe replied the truck was not for sale. Defendant walked away, but then he again returned to Doe’s truck, put his bag in the bed of the truck, walked to the driver’s door which had the window open, and, without saying anything, punched Doe in the head. When Doe attempted to exit the truck to defend himself, defendant pulled him out and hit Doe a couple more times. Doe wound up on the ground in the middle of the street. Defendant then drove the truck a short distance before abandoning it to flee on foot. Doe was taken to the hospital where he was treated for a significant laceration through his ear, two black eyes, a broken nose, and two lacerations on the back of his head which required staples. In April 2023, the People charged defendant by felony information with carjacking (§ 215, subd. (a)), with enhancements alleged for inflicting great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)), committing a violent crime on a vulnerable victim (§ 667.9, subd. (a)), and inflicting great bodily injury on a vulnerable victim (§ 1203.09, subd. (a)). Defendant was also charged with assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)), with an enhancement alleged for inflicting great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). The information further alleged that defendant’s 2016 conviction for assault with a deadly weapon constituted a prior strike (§§ 667, subds. (d), (e), 1170.12, subds. (b), (c)) and a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). In June 2023, a jury found defendant guilty of both charges and found true the enhancements for inflicting great bodily injury and committing the offense on a vulnerable victim. In July 2023, after a bifurcated bench trial, the trial court found that defendant suffered a prior strike conviction.