People v. Amesquita CA5
Filed 9/2/25 P. v. Amesquita CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, F088600 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CF97583982) v.
JUAN JOSE AMESQUITA, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Gary R. Orozco, Judge. Laura Vavakin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Levy, Acting P. J., Detjen, J. and DeSantos, J.
In 1997, the trial court sentenced defendant Juan Jose Amesquita to 21 years plus 100 years to life for murder and unlawful possession of a firearm. In 2024, defendant appeared for resentencing pursuant to Senate Bill No. 483 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 728, § 3), codified as Penal Code1 section 1172.75.2 At the hearing, the trial court struck defendant’s prior prison term enhancement, but otherwise left his sentence intact. Counsel for defendant asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Defendant was advised of his right to file a letter stating any grounds on which to base an appeal within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief, however, he did not file a letter. Defendant has identified no basis for relief, nor have we. We affirm. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On May 8, 1997, a jury convicted defendant of first degree murder (§ 187, count 1) and unlawful possession of a firearm (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1), counts 2 & 3). As to count 1, the jury found a firearm enhancement true (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)). In a bifurcated trial, the jury also found true two five-year serious felony sentencing enhancements (§ 667, subd. (a)), four strike priors (§ 667, subds. (b)–(i) & 1170.12, subds. (a)–(e)), and a one-year prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). On August 20, 1997, the trial court sentenced defendant to 21 years, plus 100 years to life as follows: on count 1, 75 years to life (§ 187) plus 10 years (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)); on count 3, 25 years to life (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)); and on count 2, 25 years to life, stayed pursuant to section 654. The court also imposed two five-year prior serious felony enhancements (§ 667, subd. (a)) and a one-year prior prison term enhancement (667.5, subd. (b)).
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)