People v. James CA5

Filed 11/14/24 P. v. James 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F087165 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. SC083736B) v.

MICHAEL TAVARIS JAMES, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. Michael G. Bush, Judge. Martin Baker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Kimberley A. Donohue, Assistant Attorney General, Darren K. Indermill and John W. Powell, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Poochigian, Acting P. J., Franson, J. and DeSantos, J.

Michael Tavaris James was originally convicted in 2002 in count 1 of conspiracy to commit murder (Pen. Code, § 182, subd. (a)(1)1 and in count 2 of attempted murder with premeditation and deliberation (§§ 664/187, subd. (a)). James was sentenced to 25 years to life with the possibility of parole on count 1 and 15 years to life on count 2. The trial court also imposed two one-year priors (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), staying one of the terms. Two appeals followed. In James’s first appeal, in an unpublished opinion, this court remanded the case back to the trial court with directions to hold a hearing on James’s Marsden2 motion and, if the motion was denied, to correct James’s sentence on count 2 to life with the possibility of parole in place of the incorrectly imposed sentence of 15 years to life, and to strike one of the prior prison term enhancements. (People v. James (Nov. 14, 2003, F040735) [nonpub. opn.] 2003 WL 22683401, at [15].) James again appealed his conviction, arguing that the trial court erred when it denied his requests for independent counsel to assist him in the Marsden hearing. In an unpublished opinion, this Court affirmed the judgment but agreed that the trial court erred in failing to prepare an amended abstract of judgment as previously ordered, with the correct sentence for count 2. (People v. James (Feb. 9, 2005, F045343) [nonpub. opn.] 2005 WL 294384,