People v. Guevara CA2/6

Filed 6/18/25 P. v. Guevara CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B336331 (Super. Ct. No. TA100162) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

JOSE MANUEL GUEVARA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Jose Manuel Guevara appeals following a Penal Code section 1172.751 resentencing. He contends: (1) the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero); and (2) the clerk’s minutes and abstract of judgment must be corrected to accurately reflect the court’s oral pronouncement. We will order correction of the minute order and abstract of judgment. We will otherwise affirm the judgment.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In our prior unpublished opinion modifying appellant’s credits and affirming the judgment in all other respects (People v. Guevara (Apr. 25, 2000, B130432) [nonpub. opn.]), we summarized the trial evidence as follows:2 “During an afternoon in October 1998, [appellant] jumped over a stucco wall surrounding the yard and house owned by the Hendersons. No one was at home and all doors, sliding glass windows and gates were locked. Once in the yard, [appellant] broke into an enclosed patio through a sliding glass door. [Appellant] took a set of keys from inside the patio and unsuccessfully tried to open doors to the house with the keys. Then, [appellant] obtained gardening shears and pliers from the patio and tried to pry open doors to the house. Some of [appellant’s] actions were witnessed by neighbors who called the police. The police arrived promptly and arrested [appellant] at the scene. Prior to the arrest, officers witnessed some of [appellant’s] efforts to pry open doors. There was considerable damage to the house and grounds, including a broken lock on a gate and four damaged doors.” On March 1, 1999, a jury convicted appellant of first degree residential burglary (§ 459). In a bifurcated proceeding, the court found true a prison prior (§ 667.5, subd. (b)), a serious felony prior (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)), and eight prior convictions within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). The court sentenced appellant to 30 years to life in prison: 25 years to life on the burglary charge pursuant to the