People v. Fox CA2/3

California Court of Appeal Jun 18, 2025 No. B339074Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying probation to a defendant convicted of hit and run driving resulting in injury, as the court properly weighed aggravating factors—including the defendant's flight from the scene and subsequent attempt to conceal evidence—against the defendant's mitigating circumstances.

Issues

Did the trial court abuse its discretion by denying the defendant's request for probation?

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The trial court did not abuse its discretion by finding that the aggravating factors regarding the nature of the crime and Fox’s conduct outweighed them.”

“A grant or denial of probation is within the trial court’s sound discretion, and its ruling will not be disturbed unless it is shown the court exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner.”

Filed 6/18/25 P. v. Fox CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

THE PEOPLE, B339074

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GA115395) v.

DEVONTE FOX,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Dorothy L. Shubin, Judge. Affirmed. Law Offices of John F. Schuck and John F. Schuck, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Idan Ivri and David A. Wildman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________

A jury convicted Devonte Fox of hit and run driving resulting in injury to another, and the jury found that the offense involved an act revealing a high degree of callousness. The trial court denied Fox’s request for probation and sentenced him to two years in prison. On appeal, Fox contends that the trial court abused its discretion by not sentencing him to probation. We find no abuse of discretion and affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND I. Evidence at trial A. Prosecution evidence Fox and Kierra Charles were childhood friends. But around 2020 or 2021, their friendship ended when Fox posted something on Instagram about a member of Charles’s family. However, Fox remained friends with Charles’s sister Kamuara Mitchell and cousin Shana Pittmon. On the evening of June 27, 2023, Charles was at her apartment with her two young children when Pittmon called and asked Charles to meet her in the parking lot. Mitchell, Fox, and several others were in the parking lot, where they drank liquor. Charles saw Fox drinking, and Charles thought he was intoxicated. Fox said, “Hi,” to Charles. Charles responded, “Hi,” but Fox got mad, called her greeting fake, and cursed at her. Fox got close to Charles’s face, and they argued. Their argument turned physical, they pushed each other, and Fox threw her to the ground. The police arrived, having received a noise complaint. The group started to go inside, and the police left. Charles went to get her wallet, cellphone, and purse, which she had left on her cousin’s car. However, Fox grabbed the items and ran to his car

People v. Fox CA2/3

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE, B339074

DEVONTE FOX,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

EDMON, P. J.

ADAMS, J.

AI Brief