People v. Ramirez CA4/3

Filed 4/29/25 P. v. Ramirez 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 Appellant, G063907

v. (Super. Ct. No. SWF2100695)

ROBERTO ANDRES RAMIREZ, OPINION

Defendant and Respondent.

Appeal from a prejudgment order of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Jeffrey M. Zimel, Judge. Affirmed. Stephanie M. Adraktas, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Respondent. Michael A. Hestrin, Riverside County District Attorney, Janinda Gunawardene, Deputy District Attorney, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

After Respondent Roberto Andres Ramirez was charged with robbery, he filed a written motion pursuant to Penal Code section 13811, which allows a defendant who is currently imprisoned to request a speedy trial on a newly charged offense within 90 days of providing notice to the prosecution. After filing the section 1381 motion, Ramirez was absent from court on two separate occasions. Ramirez subsequently moved to dismiss the robbery charge on the ground the prosecution did not comply with its duty under section 1381 to transport him to trial within 90 days. The trial court granted the motion to dismiss. Appellant Riverside County District Attorney seeks reversal, arguing Ramirez is not entitled to have the charges dismissed because any delay was due to his purposeful refusal to be transported for trial. We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion and therefore affirm the prejudgment order granting Ramirez’s motion to dismiss. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In May 2021, Ramirez was charged with one count of robbery (§ 211). The complaint also alleged Ramirez had suffered a prior strike (§§ 667, subds. (c), (e)(1), 1170.12 (c)(1)). On May 30, 2023, while incarcerated in state prison on other charges, Ramirez filed a demand for trial on the robbery charge pursuant to section 1381. On June 14, the District Attorney requested a court order directing the superintendent of Pleasant Valley State Prison to deliver Ramirez to the Riverside County Sheriff’s Office for transport to Riverside County Superior Court for trial.