People v. Puckett CA2/6

Filed 7/14/25 P. v. Puckett CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B339001 (Super. Ct. No. 24CAPH01852) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

LAMONT RALPH PUCKETT,

Defendant and Appellant.

Lamont Ralph Puckett appeals from the trial court’s order revoking his parole and remanding him to the custody of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) and the jurisdiction of the Board of Parole Hearings (BPH) pursuant to Penal Code,1 section 3000.08, subdivision (h). He contends, and the Attorney General concedes, the order was erroneous because his parole term was three years (§ 3000.01, subd. (b)(2)) and not life (§ 3000.1, subd. (a)), and consequently the sanction of return to prison pursuant to section 3000.08,

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

subdivision (h) did not apply. We agree. We affirm the order revoking Puckett’s parole but reverse the order remanding him to CDCR custody and BPH jurisdiction. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In 1993, Puckett was convicted of first degree murder (§§ 187, subd. (a), 189, subd. (a)), assault by force likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), and battery causing serious bodily injury (§ 243, subd. (d)). He was sentenced to life in prison with parole. He was released on parole on November 24, 2020. He was scheduled to be discharged from parole on November 24, 2023. Because he absconded supervision, the running of the parole period was tolled from August 30, 2023, until his arrest on March 30, 2024. Following a parole revocation petition from the parole agent and an evidentiary hearing, the trial court on June 25, 2024, found Puckett violated parole by absconding from supervision, committing grand theft of an automobile, and possessing a firearm and ammunition. The court revoked parole supervision and remanded Puckett to the custody of CDCR and BPH jurisdiction for the purpose of future parole consideration (§ 3000.08, subd. (h)). Appointed counsel initially found no arguable issues on appeal and filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216. After Puckett filed a supplemental brief in propria persona raising the issue of his parole term, we requested and received briefs on that issue from appointed counsel and the Attorney General. DISCUSSION When a parolee violates parole and the parole agency determines intermediate sanctions are not appropriate, it shall petition the court to revoke parole. (§ 3000.08, subd. (f).) If the