People v. Stout CA3

Filed 12/5/24 P. v. Stout CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

(Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE, C099922

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 16F2193, 16F2518, 16F4167) v.

DOUGLAS JEREMIAH STOUT,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Douglas Jeremiah Stout asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant. We affirm. I. BACKGROUND This case returns after our most recent remand for resentencing. In the first case (case No. 16F2193), defendant pleaded no contest to receiving a stolen motor vehicle with a prior felony and admitted a prior prison term. (Pen. Code,1

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

§§ 496d, subd. (a), 666.5, 667.5, former subd. (b).) (People v. Stout (Nov. 15, 2022, C095431) [nonpub. opn.] (Stout II).) A deputy sheriff pulled defendant over while defendant was driving a truck. When asked for the truck’s registration and insurance, defendant said he did not have either as he had borrowed the truck from an acquaintance. The deputy noticed the steering column was covered by tape and the ignition appeared to be hanging by wires. The vehicle identification number and license plate did not match. Defendant admitted he suspected the truck was stolen. In the second case (case No. 16F2518), defendant pleaded no contest to possessing a billy club. (§ 22210.) In that case, a police officer noticed a car parked in a fast-food restaurant parking lot with its door open. When the officer asked defendant to get out of the car, he saw a large wooden billy club on the floorboard. In the third case (case No. 16F4167), a jury found defendant guilty of assault with a semiautomatic firearm, attempted carjacking, attempted kidnapping, two counts of possession of a firearm by a felon, criminal threats, armed criminal action, and illegal possession of ammunition. (§§ 245, subd. (b), 664/215, subd. (a), 664/207, subd. (a), 29800, subd. (a)(1), 422, 25800, 30305, subd. (a).) (People v. Stout (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 669, 673 (Stout I).) The jury also found the personal use of firearm enhancements true. (§§ 12022.5, subd. (a), 12022.53, subd. (b).) (Stout I, at p. 673.) The trial court found true allegations as to all counts that defendant had served five prior prison terms (§ 667.5, former subd. (b)) and had committed the current offenses while released on bail on the other cases (§ 12022.1). (Stout I, at pp. 673-674.) Defendant’s first victim encountered defendant at a shopping mall, where he told her to “ ‘Get in your car or I will fucking kill you.’ ” (Stout I, supra, 38 Cal.App.5th at p. 672.) Defendant was pointing a semiautomatic handgun at her stomach. (Ibid.) The victim responded with an expletive, pushed defendant away, and he fled the scene. (Ibid.)