People v. Barragan CA2/8

Filed 2/7/25 P. v. Barragan CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B335687

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA152980 v.

JUAN BARRAGAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Sean D. Coen, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Law Offices of Andy Miri and Andy Miri for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Shezad Thakor and Lauren N. Guber, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________

We remand for resentencing. Unspecified code citations are to the Penal Code. We stated the circumstances of Juan Barragan’s crime in our 2023 opinion. In brief, Barragan and another man beat the victim at a gas station and robbed him of his car. We grant the prosecution’s request to take judicial notice of the record in that appeal. (See People v. Barragan (Jan. 12, 2023, B318424) [nonpub. opn.] (Barragan I).) We now incorporate all facts from that 2023 opinion. In 2023, we upheld Barragan’s carjacking conviction but vacated his 23-year prison sentence. (Barragan I, supra.) The sentencing issue hinged on changes to section 1170, which governs this sentencing. (See id.) Barragan argued the trial court incorrectly imposed the upper term for carjacking based on aggravating factors the jury did not consider. This would violate subdivisions (b)(1) and (2) of the amended statute. We noted appellate courts were split on the standard for harmless error and reversed based on another part of the amended statute: new subdivision (b)(6) required the lower term in certain circumstances, and the trial court did not correctly apply this provision. (Barragan I, supra.) We remanded for resentencing under amended section 1170, subdivision (b). (Id.) On remand, in September 2023, the trial court held a brief hearing and imposed the same sentence—23 years—consisting of the upper term of nine years for carjacking, doubled due to a prior strike, plus five years for a prior serious felony conviction enhancement. Before imposing this sentence, the trial court weighed mitigating and aggravating factors as outlined in subdivision