People v. Felder CA4/1
Filed 7/30/25 P. v. Felder CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THE PEOPLE, D085875
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v. (Super. Ct. No. FVI21002973)
ARTHUR GLENN FELDER, JR.,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, Miriam I. Morton, Judge. Affirmed as modified. Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina and Kelley Johnson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Arthur Felder, Jr., appeals his sentence after a jury found him guilty of
possession of an assault weapon (Pen. Code,1 § 30605, subd. (a)), possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)), and possession of ammunition by a felon (§ 30305, subd. (a)(1)), with two strike priors (§§ 667, subds. (b)–(i), 1170.12, subd. (a)). The trial court imposed an aggregate prison sentence of seven years four months. On appeal, Felder contends that consecutive and concurrent sentences imposed by the trial court violated section 654. We agree that the trial court violated section 654 by imposing consecutive sentences for possession of a firearm and possession of ammunition for the firearm, and also by imposing concurrent sentences for possession of a firearm and possession of an assault weapon based on the same firearm. We therefore modify the judgment to comply with section 654. As so modified, the judgment is affirmed. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. The 911 Call and Investigation One afternoon in October 2021, Corey S. was sitting at his kitchen table on his computer when he heard a gunshot behind his apartment. He opened his sliding glass door and saw a Black male holding what he believed was a shotgun with a pistol grip up in the air. The person was wearing blue headphones, had a medical brace on his foot, and was hobbling and standing next to a wheelchair. Corey S. did not see anyone else when he looked outside. He later identified Felder as the person he saw holding the gun. Corey S. called 911 and sheriff’s deputies arrived on the scene within 10 minutes. At the location of the incident, the deputies observed a Black male wearing a medical boot and blue headphones. There was a wheelchair nearby. The person was Felder. Felder was walking with his brother and
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)