People v. Wimberly CA5

Filed 10/30/25 P. v. Wimberly 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F086276 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR21009930) v.

RONALD ALLEN WIMBERLY, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Nancy A. Leo, Judge. Joy A. Maulitz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

* Before Franson, Acting P. J., Snauffer, J. and Fain, J.† † Judge of the Fresno Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Kimberley A. Donohue, Assistant Attorney General, Amanda D. Cary and Jesica Gonzalez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- Defendant Ronald Allen Wimberly contends on appeal that two enhancements under Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1)1 found true by the trial court were unauthorized and must be stricken. The People agree, as do we. We strike two of defendant’s section 667, subdivision (a)(1) enhancements. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On December 1, 2021, the Stanislaus County District Attorney filed an information charging defendant with assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1); count 1). It was further alleged that defendant suffered four prior serious felony convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)) and four prior strike convictions (§ 667, subd. (d)). Defendant pled not guilty and denied all special allegations. On March 14, 2022, a jury found defendant guilty on count 1. On March 16, 2022, in a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true the four prior serious felony convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)) and the four prior strike convictions (§ 667, subd. (d)). On May 5, 2023, the court denied defendant’s Romero2 motion, and sentenced defendant on count 1 to an indeterminate term of 25 years to life, pursuant to the “Three Strikes” law (§ 667, subd. (d)), plus 20 years for the four prior serious felony enhancements (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)).

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.