People v. Brown CA3

Filed 10/17/25 P. v. Brown CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Lassen) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C102343

v. (Super. Ct. No. 2024- CR0090337) TRAVELL BROWN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Travell Brown asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Our review of the record discloses that the trial court did not orally pronounce a $300 parole revocation fine matching the $300 restitution fine

1

as required by law. (Pen. Code, § 1202.45, subd. (a).)1 We will modify the judgment to impose the $300 parole revocation fine. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will affirm the judgment as modified. I In July 2022, defendant was incarcerated in High Desert State Prison. He approached another inmate and punched him in the face. The victim fell to the ground where he lay motionless for a few minutes before getting up and walking toward correctional officers. The victim sustained a cut to his chin and a bump on the back of his head. In January 2024, the People charged defendant with assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury, while confined in a state prison. (§ 4501, subd. (b).) The People alleged that during the commission of the crime, defendant personally inflicted great bodily injury on the victim. (§ 12022.7, subd. (a).) The People further alleged that defendant had two prior strike convictions for robbery (§ 211) and assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)). In August 2024, the trial court denied defendant’s motion to replace appointed counsel. During a trial readiness conference that same day, the trial court noted that the People had offered defendant the low term of two years, doubled, and the offer remained open. The trial court informed defendant he could take the offer or go to trial. The trial court repeatedly asked defendant if he wanted to accept the plea offer or go to trial, but defendant refused to answer and turned his back to counsel and the trial court. The trial court said defendant was “choosing his path” and confirmed trial. Trial began on October 1, 2024. Before selecting a jury, the trial court advised defendant that he was facing a term of 25 years to life, but the People were offering him