People v. Hamilton CA2/2
Filed 6/5/25 P. v. Hamilton CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE, B340080
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 24LBCF00173) v.
ERIC DEWAYNE HAMILTON,
Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT: Eric Dewayne Hamilton was convicted by jury of arson and falsely sounding a fire alarm. (Pen. Code, §§ 451, subd. (d), 148.4, subd. (a)(2).)1 He waived trial on his prior felony convictions and admitted to a conviction for assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury. (§§ 245, subd. (a)(4), 1170.12.) The trial court sentenced him to the high term of three years in prison for arson and 180 concurrent days for sounding the fire alarm; it dismissed
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
his felony “strike.”2 We review his appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Before trial, the court denied Hamilton’s motion for new counsel pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118. When counsel voiced doubts about Hamilton’s mental state, the court suspended proceedings. A psychiatrist examined Hamilton; based on the report, the court found him competent to stand trial. The evidence shows that Hamilton entered the Long Beach Police Department on February 3, 2024. An employee at the front desk saw him near the fire alarm. Seconds later, Hamilton activated the alarm, then sat down in the lobby near a pay phone. The eyewitness testimony was supported by surveillance footage. Hamilton ignited a cigarette lighter and held it to the pay phone receiver. The front desk employee told him to stop; he continued despite the warning. The fire department arrived. An investigator examined the pay phone and saw soot and a small amount of fire damage to the receiver. Hamilton did not testify. In his argument, defense counsel did not deny the events at the police department, but told jurors that Hamilton’s conduct “was a cry for help.” He was not in his right state of mind, as can be seen in his “increasingly bizarre behavior” on video. There was no serious attempt to light a fire. The jury deliberated for one hour before finding Hamilton guilty as charged. In a sentencing memorandum, the People wrote that Hamilton has six prior felony convictions and nine misdemeanor convictions; the felonies increased in severity over time, from theft offenses to violent acts. He committed new crimes while on probation or parole.
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)