People v. Rodriguez CA6

Filed 9/11/25 P. v. Rodriguez CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H052330, H052331, H052333, H052336 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Clara County Super. Ct. Nos. C1775953, C1778051, v. C2216477, C2303755)

FABIAN RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Fabian Rodriguez appeals from a final judgment in a criminal action. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief summarizing the case but raising no issues. We notified defendant of his right to submit written argument on his own behalf, and he did not do so. In connection with the appeals, appointed counsel asked the trial court to correct an apparent error in the presentence custody credit awarded to defendant. This court has been notified by appointed counsel and the trial court that, after initially reallocating presentence credit, the trial court then restored the original credit allocation that counsel had argued was erroneous. Independently reviewing the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, we requested supplemental briefing regarding the presentence credit issue. Both parties confirmed an error in the allocation of credit awarded to defendant; we agree and will correct the error.

I. BACKGROUND In 2019, defendant was charged in case No. C1775953 with murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a); unspecified statutory references are to this code). According to the probation report, defendant’s friend contacted the victim and arranged to buy drugs, and defendant accompanied his friend to meet the victim. During the transaction and “without apparent provocation,” defendant and his friend attacked and stabbed the victim, who died from his injuries. In 2021, defendant was charged in case No. C1778051 with two counts of second degree robbery (§ 212.5, subd. (c)) involving personal use of a firearm. (§ 12022.53, subd. (b).) According to the probation report, defendant and another man entered a convenience store and asked the clerk for “an 18-pack of beer.” When the clerk retrieved the beer from a locked refrigerator, defendant pointed a gun at her and the two men left the store without saying anything. Both the murder and the robbery took place in 2017, and the probation report states that defendant was arrested in connection with both cases on November 30, 2017. In 2022, defendant was charged in case No. C2216477 with assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)). In 2023, he was also charged in case No. C2303755 with assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury. Both assault charges were based on attacks on fellow inmates in the Santa Clara County jail. In the latter case No. C2303755, defendant was alleged to have personally inflicted great bodily injury. (§ 12022.7, subd. (a).) In 2024, the trial court found defendant competent to stand trial. Defendant then pleaded no contest to second degree murder in case No. C1775953; pleaded no contest to one count of robbery and admitted the firearm allegation in case No. C1778051; pleaded no contest to two counts of assault by means of force likely to cause great bodily injury in case Nos. C2216477 and C2303755; and admitted personally inflicting great bodily injury in case No. C2303755. In the murder case, defendant stipulated to a factual basis 2