The People v. McCoy CA5

Filed 9/3/13 P. v. McCoy CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F064816 & F065075

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. BF136782A & BF135575A) JOSEPH DANIEL MCCOY, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Michael B. Lewis, Judge. Sara H. Ruddy, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Kathleen A. McKenna and William K. Kim, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

 Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Kane, J., and Franson, J.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, on April 22, 2011, in Kern County Superior Court case No. BF135575A, appellant, Joseph Daniel McCoy, pleaded no contest to making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422)1 and the court conditionally dismissed four other felony charges. On July 25, 2011, an information was filed in Kern County Superior Court case No. BF136782A, charging appellant and his mother, Darlene Green, with one count of elder abuse under circumstances likely to cause great bodily injury or death (§ 368, subd. (b)(1)), and alleging that appellant and Green inflicted great bodily injury on a person 70 years of age or older (§ 368, subd. (b)(2)(B)) and proximately caused the victim‟s death within the meaning of section 368, subdivision (b)(3)(B). We refer to case No. BF136782A as the elder abuse case. On January 4, 2012, appellant entered into a new plea agreement covering both cases. Pursuant to this plea agreement, the following occurred: First, the information in the elder abuse case was amended to add an enhancement allegation under section 12022.7 (personal infliction of great bodily injury), the court conditionally dismissed the special allegations under subdivisions (b)(2)(B) and (b)(3)(B) of section 368, and appellant pleaded no contest to the elder abuse charge and admitted the great bodily injury enhancement allegation. Second, in case No. BF135575A, the criminal threats charge, to which appellant had previously pleaded no contest was dismissed pursuant to section 1385 and the information was amended to add a charge of infliction of injury on a domestic partner (§ 273.5, subd. (a)), to which appellant pleaded no contest. We refer to case No. BF135575A as the domestic violence case.