People v. Brandon CA3

Filed 8/28/25 P. v. Brandon CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C100696

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23FE003999)

v.

ERICK BRANDON,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Erick Brandon guilty of rape and assault with intent to commit oral copulation and found true prior serious felony convictions as well as several aggravating factors. Defendant pled guilty to illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. The trial court sentenced him under the Three Strikes law to an aggregate term of 54 years to life in prison. On appeal, defendant contends: (1) his waiver of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel was invalid because the trial court failed to advise him of his maximum potential sentence; and (2) the trial court prejudicially erred by failing to strike his prior serious felony convictions factors under Penal Code section 1385, subdivision (c). We disagree and affirm. Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The People charged defendant with rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2)), assault with intent to commit oral copulation (§ 220), and illegal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)). The People alleged defendant had three prior serious felony convictions (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12), as well as the following aggravating factors: (1) defendant had engaged in violent conduct that indicated a serious danger to society, (2) defendant’s prior convictions were numerous or of increasing seriousness, (3) defendant had served a prior term in prison or county jail, (4) defendant was on probation, mandatory supervision, postrelease community supervision, or parole when the crimes were committed, and (5) defendant’s prior performance on probation, mandatory supervision, postrelease community supervision, or parole was unsatisfactory. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(1)-(5).) Prior to trial, defendant pled guilty to the firearm possession count. A jury found defendant guilty of the other two counts. In the second phase of the trial, the same jury found true the prior serious felony convictions and the aggravating factors that defendant had served a prior prison or jail term, that defendant was on probation, supervision, or parole when the crimes were committed, and that defendant’s prior performance on probation, supervision, or parole was unsatisfactory. But it found not true that defendant engaged in violent conduct that indicated a serious danger to society. The trial court additionally found defendant’s prior convictions were numerous. The trial court sentenced defendant under the Three Strikes law to an aggregate term of 50 years to life plus 4 years in prison, consisting of a 25-years-to-life term on the rape count, a consecutive 25-years-to-life term on the assault count, and a consecutive 2- year term on the firearm possession count, doubled due to his prior strikes. Defendant timely appeals.