People v. Fisher CA3

Filed 11/26/25 P. v. Fisher CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C101929

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 23FE014397)

v.

JAROD FISHER,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury convicted defendant Jarod Fisher of assault with a deadly weapon by a prisoner and possession of a weapon in a prison. The trial court sentenced defendant to 25 years to life for the assault and stayed punishment for the possession conviction pursuant to Penal Code section 654.1 On appeal, defendant primarily argues that his sentence in this case should be “ordered corrected” to run concurrently to the sentence he

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

is already serving from a prior case. This contention lacks merit. Defendant also claims that a clerical error in the determinate abstract of judgment warrants correction. We conclude that correcting the abstract is unnecessary, as the trial court erred in staying punishment for the possession conviction without imposing a sentence. We therefore remand for the trial court to impose a sentence for the possession conviction, stay execution of that sentence pursuant to section 654, and prepare an amended abstract of judgment. I. BACKGROUND On February 8, 2023, defendant attacked a fellow prison inmate. Based on this incident, a jury found defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon by a prisoner (§ 4501, subd. (a)) and possession of a weapon in a prison (§ 4502, subd. (a)). As to the assault, the jury found true that defendant personally inflicted great bodily injury on the victim (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). Defendant admitted two aggravating circumstances and that he had suffered three prior strike convictions. The trial court sentenced defendant to 25 years to life for the assault conviction (due to the prior strikes), three years for the great bodily injury enhancement, and two five-year terms for prior serious felony enhancements. The court’s oral pronouncement did not indicate whether defendant’s 25 years-to-life sentence would be consecutive to the sentence defendant was already serving, but the indeterminate abstract of judgment indicates that this sentence was consecutive. The court stayed punishment for the possession conviction pursuant to section 654 without imposing a sentence. Nonetheless, the determinate abstract of judgment indicates that the trial court imposed the upper term for this conviction. Defendant timely appealed. II. DISCUSSION Defendant first contends the sentence imposed in this case should be corrected to run concurrently to the sentence he was already serving when the present offenses were