The People v. Hernandez CA4/3
Filed 9/20/13 P. v. Hernandez 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 Respondent, G047439
v. (Super. Ct. No. 11CF3348)
OSCAR PAZ HERNANDEZ, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, James Edward Rogan, Judge. Affirmed. Gail Ganaja, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
A jury found defendant Oscar Paz Hernandez guilty of felony hit and run with permanent injury (Veh. Code, § 20001, subds. (a), (b)(2)). The trial court denied probation and sentenced him to the middle term of three years. The court stated it had seriously considered imposing the four-year upper term because of the catastrophic injuries inflicted and defendant’s inexcusable conduct in leaving the victim. The court based its sentencing decision on “the nature, seriousness and circumstances of the crime . . . the vulnerability of the victim upon being left at the scene by [defendant]. And . . ., the incalculable physical and emotional injury inflicted on the victim.” Defendant’s appeal raises a single issue: did the trial court abuse its discretion by failing to either grant probation or impose the lower term of two years. We reject defendant’s contention and affirm the judgment. The accident occurred early in the morning when defendant rear ended his victim’s car. The impact was severe and the victim was seriously and permanently injured. Defendant left the scene of the accident, leaving the unconscious victim’s vehicle in the fast lane, facing oncoming traffic.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)