People v. Gonzalez CA2/1

Filed 7/10/25 P. v. Gonzalez CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, B339780

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA504553) v.

ANGEL ALFREDO VELASQUEZ GONZALEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Karla D. Kerlin, Judge. Sentence vacated and remanded with directions. Law Offices of Andy Miri and Andy Miri for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Seth P. McCutcheon and Lindsay Boyd, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _______________________________

We resolve this case by memorandum opinion because it “raise[s] no substantial issues of law or fact.” (Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 8.1.) A jury found Angel Alfredo Velasquez Gonzalez (Velasquez)1 guilty of five counts of sexual intercourse or sodomy with a child under 10 by a person 18 or older (Pen. Code,2 § 288.7, subd. (a)), four counts against one victim (D.V.), and one count against another (S.P.). The punishment for a violation of section 288.7, subdivision (a), is 25 years to life in state prison. The district attorney filed a sentencing memorandum, urging the trial court to impose a sentence of 125 years to life: a consecutive term of 25 years to life for each of the five counts under section 288.7, subdivision (a). In support of the request for consecutive terms, the district attorney cited section 667.6, subdivision (d)(1), which provides: “A full, separate, and consecutive term shall be imposed for each violation of an offense specified in subdivision (e) if the crimes involve separate victims or involve the same victim on separate occasions.” The district attorney asserted that the trial court was “bound by law to impose full, separate, and consecutive sentences for all counts” because “[c]ounts 1 through 4 involve conduct against the same victim on separate occasions” and “[c]ount 5 involves the same conduct [against] a separate victim,” within the meaning of section 667.6, subdivision (d)(1). In his sentencing memorandum, Velasquez asked the court to sentence him to 25 years to life on count 1 and run the terms