People v. Castaneda-Jimenez CA1/1

Filed 3/20/25 P. v. Castaneda-Jimenez CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, A170568 v. MARTIN ENRIQUE CASTANEDA- (Napa County JIMENEZ, Super. Ct. No. 20CR002364) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Martin Enrique Castaneda-Jimenez appeals from the judgment imposed after he pled no contest to felony evading a peace officer with willful disregard for safety (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)). His appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), identifying no issues and requesting that this court independently review the record. Having done so, the record did not reveal any arguable issues and, accordingly, we affirm. I. BACKGROUND In August 2020, defendant led law enforcement on a 48-mile high-speed pursuit beginning in St. Helena and ending when he crashed exiting highway 580 in the East Bay. During the pursuit, defendant drove between 100 and 130 miles per hour in the dark, turned off and on his headlights, ran vehicles

1

off the road, and weaved around cars.1 He was arrested and released on bail the same day. After an initial complaint was filed, in July 2021, defendant was charged by felony information with one count of evading a peace officer with a willful disregard for safety (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a); Napa case). In August 2022, defendant pled no contest to that count. In the plea form, he stated his understanding that the maximum penalty was three years and that the trial court had indicated a midterm sentence of two years. The court referred the matter to the probation department and set a sentencing hearing. Defendant failed to appear at the September 2022 sentencing hearing and the trial court issued a bench warrant. The record reveals that at some point, defendant was arrested and charged in Alameda County for a separate offense (Alameda case). According to the presentence report, in January 2024, defendant was sentenced in the Alameda case to two years in prison for a felony conviction of assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(4)).2 After learning defendant’s whereabouts, at the People’s request, on March 21, 2024, defendant was transported from prison to the Napa County Department of Corrections and a detainer was placed on him. In an updated presentence report, probation stated that defendant was entitled to one day of custody credit—the date of his arrest in 2020—and asserted that while he had again been in custody since March 21, 2024, he was not entitled to credits for that time because he was a sentenced prisoner in the Alameda case.