People v. Lopez CA3
Filed 5/27/25 P. v. Lopez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----
THE PEOPLE, C100694
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 22CM04417, 23CF02268, 23CF02277, v. 23CF02286, 23CM00815, 23CM01295) DAMACIO SUFERINO LOPEZ,
Defendant and Appellant.
Originally charged with committing multiple offenses in five different criminal matters while on probation in a sixth criminal matter, defendant Damacio Suferino Lopez pled no contest to two felonies and five misdemeanors in exchange for dismissal of the remaining counts and allegations. He was sentenced to six years in state prison. Without objection, the trial court imposed an $80 court operations assessment ($40 per felony conviction), a $60 criminal conviction assessment ($30 per felony conviction), and $1,050 in restitution fines. Citing People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157, defendant contends the trial court violated the prohibition against excessive fines and his rights to equal protection
1
and due process in imposing the assessments and restitution fines without holding an ability-to-pay hearing. To the extent any of these issues have been forfeited, defendant asserts ineffective assistance of counsel. Our review of the record revealed an error in the abstract of judgment. We will order the trial court to issue a corrected abstract that reflects the oral pronouncement of judgment and otherwise affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Case No. 23CF02277 (2277) In April 2023, defendant was speeding and unsafely passing other motorists while driving. After a California Highway Patrol officer unsuccessfully attempted to stop defendant, defendant crashed his car. Defendant got out of the car and fled on foot. Defendant was charged with felony fleeing a pursuing peace officer while driving recklessly (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a); count 01) and misdemeanor resisting arrest (Pen. Code,1 § 148, subd. (a)(1); count 02). The court subsequently amended the information to add misdemeanor evading a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.1; count 03). 2. Case No. 23CF02268 (2268) In May 2023, defendant crashed his car while driving with his girlfriend S.R. and fled the scene on foot. The two, who shared a child together, had been arguing before the crash, and defendant struck her in the face while he was driving. A responding officer noticed S.R.’s face was swollen and her lip was bleeding. Another officer found defendant walking along the side of the road. Defendant’s eyes were red and watery, and he smelled of alcohol. Tests revealed defendant’s blood-alcohol level was between 0.08 percent and 0.09 percent.
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)