People v. Estrada CA4/3

Filed 5/6/25 P. v. Estrada 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G063496

v. (Super. Ct. No. 18NF2612)

WESLEY GERARDO ESTRADA, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert A. Knox, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. Jeffrey S. Kross, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Eric A. Swenson and Monique Myers, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Wesley Gerardo Estrada challenges his sentence for multiple sex offenses against children. He contends the trial court wrongly imposed a consecutive sentence on count 8 because nothing showed it was committed on a separate occasion from another offense. We conclude the court permissibly found that count 8 occurred on a separate occasion, rendering a consecutive sentence mandatory. Although Estrada attacks only the sentence on count 8, we address an error identified by the Attorney General regarding count 7. We agree with the Attorney General that the trial court improperly imposed a one-strike sentence on count 7 despite finding that it occurred during the same incident as another count that already received a one-strike sentence. Thus, we reverse the sentence on count 7 and remand for resentencing. FACTS