People v. Cosner CA4/3
Filed 1/22/25 P. v. Cosner CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, G064465
v. (Super. Ct. No. FSB23002181)
JOSIAH ADRIAN COSNER, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, David S. Cohn, Judge. Affirmed. Laura Vavakin, 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, Steve Oetting and Kristin Ramirez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant Josiah Adrian Cosner appeals from the judgment of conviction entered after a jury found him guilty of receiving a stolen vehicle and the trial court found he suffered four prior convictions. Cosner’s only argument in this appeal is the trial court abused its discretion by imposing the upper four-year prison term. For the reasons we explain, the record shows the trial court understood and applied the correct law at the sentencing hearing and did not abuse its discretion by selecting and imposing the upper term. We therefore affirm. FACTS Around 11:00 p.m. on June 29, 2023, Sean V. parked and locked his parents’ car (the car) in a parking lot at California State University San Bernardino. The following morning, he returned to the parking lot but found the car missing; he saw broken glass on the ground where the right passenger window had been. He contacted police and made a report. On July 1, 2023, Redlands Police Officer James Ragan received a stolen vehicle notification from the police department’s Flock System. The Flock System is a system of cameras that have automated license plate readers. The Flock System notifies officers by e-mail when a stolen vehicle is detected by one of the cameras which takes a snapshot of the vehicle. Ragan received an alert a camera at a particular intersection had detected the car’s license plate. He received an image from the camera showing the car with the identified license plate; the vehicle appeared to have a single occupant wearing a white shirt. While driving in the area of the intersection, Ragan saw the car parked in a park about 400 feet from where the Flock System indicated the vehicle’s license plate had been detected. The front passenger window of the car was completely shattered and the vehicle’s ignition column appeared to
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)