People v. Beck CA3

Filed 11/21/25 P. v. Beck CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C101311

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. STKCRFE20230003026) v.

LORETTA LASHALE BECK,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Loretta Lashale Beck guilty of two counts of child abduction for taking two of her grandchildren from her son-in-law. The trial court suspended imposition of the sentence and granted probation for a term of four years. On appeal, Beck contends the trial court misinterpreted the statutory scheme and erred by imposing a four-year term of probation. We conclude the court did not err and will affirm.

1

BACKGROUND The People charged Beck with two counts of child abduction in violation of Penal Code1 section 278 and alleged two aggravating circumstances. At trial, the People asked the trial court to strike the aggravating circumstance allegations, and the court granted the request. The jury found Beck guilty of both counts of child abduction. The probation department recommended that the trial court grant probation but require Beck to serve time in jail as a condition of probation. Beck asked the court to reduce her convictions to misdemeanors and sentence her to time served or a fine. The People asked the court to sentence Beck to three years in prison. At the sentencing hearing, the People opposed Beck’s request to reduce her convictions to misdemeanors and asked the trial court to impose a jail sentence even if the court were inclined to grant probation. The court asked the parties what the applicable statutory probationary period would be for Beck’s offenses. The prosecutor initially stated that the period was two years but then corrected himself and explained: “Due to the nature of the relationship between the parties, it’s four years.” Beck did not object or disagree with the prosecutor’s assessment. The trial court denied Beck’s request to reduce her convictions to misdemeanors, suspended imposition of the sentence, and placed Beck on probation for four years without requiring a jail sentence as a condition of probation. Beck filed a timely notice of appeal in June 2024 from the order granting probation. Her opening brief was filed in June 2025, and this case became fully briefed on August 1, 2025.