People v. Cantu CA2/3

Filed 4/10/25 P. v. Cantu CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

THE PEOPLE, B336138

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. PA058030) v.

DAMIAN CANTU,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Hayden Zacky, Judge. Affirmed. Damian Cantu, in pro. per.; Gabriel Silvers, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ________________________

Damian Cantu appeals from a resentencing order under Penal Code section 1172.75.1 His appellate counsel filed a brief under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, and Cantu filed a supplemental brief. This case arises from a 2006 assault on Candelerio Martinez, an inmate at the Pitchess Detention Center. (People v. Tejada, et al. (Nov. 15, 2010, B215664) [nonpub. opn.].) Martinez and his fellow inmate Cantu were housed in a dorm in which Southern California Hispanic gang members were segregated. Cantu was a shot-caller in the dorm. When Martinez was found with items stolen from another inmate, Cantu ordered Martinez to be disciplined. Accordingly, a small group of men that included codefendant Randy Tejada beat Martinez. In December 2008, a jury found Cantu guilty of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1); count 2), battery (§ 243, subd. (d); count 3), aggravated mayhem (§ 205; count 4), and mayhem (§ 203; count 5). The jury found gang allegations true as to all counts (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). However, the jury acquitted Cantu of attempted murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); count 1). Thereafter, at a bench trial, the trial court found that Cantu had four prior convictions within the meaning of section 667.5, subdivision (b). In 2009, a court sentenced Cantu, on count 4, to life with a 15-year minimum term of parole eligibility and imposed four 1- year terms under section 667.5, subdivision (b). On counts 2, 3, and 5, the court sentenced Cantu to the upper terms but stayed those sentences under section 654.