People v. Gonzales CA5

Filed 10/21/25 P. v. Gonzales 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F087965 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF73424) v.

DEVYN TAYLOR HENSLEY GONZALES, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tuolumne County. Kevin M. Seibert, Judge. J. M. Malik, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P. J., Snauffer, J. and Ellison, J.† † Retired judge of the Fresno Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

Appointed counsel for Devyn Taylor Hensley Gonzales (appellant) asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (See People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Counsel filed an opening brief setting forth the case’s relevant facts. Appellant was advised of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from appellant. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to appellant, we affirm the judgment. The following is a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.) Appellant was charged in this matter with one count of driving under the influence of an alcoholic beverage causing injury in violation of Vehicle Code section 23153, subdivision (a) and one count of driving with a 0.08 percent blood-alcohol content causing injury in violation of Vehicle Code section 23153, subdivision (b). Both counts included enhancements alleging appellant personally inflicted great bodily injury upon the victim (Pen. Code, § 12022.7, subd. (a)) and had a blood-alcohol content that was 0.15 percent or greater (Veh. Code, § 23578), as well as a sentencing enhancement alleging appellant injured a particularly vulnerable victim (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(3)). Appellant pleaded not guilty and proceeded to trial. At trial, the jury heard from several prosecution witnesses, including a percipient witness to the collision, the victim, and a responding officer. The jury learned that around 12:45 a.m. on October 23, 2023, the power was out at a stoplight controlling the intersection of Highway 108 and Fifth Avenue in Tuolumne County. A Caltrans employee was working to repair the outage and was present in a lane for traffic turning left from Fifth Avenue onto Highway 108. The employee was setting out cones and was wearing both a reflective vest and a helmet with flashing lights. His work truck, parked nearby, had a flashing bar of lights turned on.