People v. Sampson CA3
Filed 12/30/25 P. v. Sampson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Butte) ----
THE PEOPLE, C102364
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 24CF02020)
v.
JASON ANTHONY SAMPSON,
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Jason Anthony Sampson contends the trial court erred when it imposed a state prison term of eight months in jail for taking a police vehicle without consent rather than the correct four-month sentence for attempted taking, the crime specified by the complaint. The appropriate term for an attempt is half the sentence for the completed crime, in this case, four months. (Pen. Code, § 664, subd. (a).)1 The People agree
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
1
defendant’s sentence is unauthorized and must be corrected, as do we. Accordingly, we will modify the sentence imposed for attempted theft to a term of four months and otherwise affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Given defendant’s contentions on appeal, we provide only a limited recitation of the facts. In April 2024, officers were dispatched to a park on a report of a domestic violence incident involving defendant and an unknown victim. Upon arriving, officers learned defendant had left. They could not locate the victim. While at the park, officers were informed of a domestic violence situation at a convenience store involving defendant and the same victim. Officers traveled to the convenience store where witnesses, and later the victim, told officers that defendant and the victim arrived there in a vehicle, the victim got out, the two argued, and defendant chased the victim and threw her to the ground. The victim also reported defendant slapped her face. Defendant fled in the vehicle. Defendant drove to where the victim’s vehicle was parked, broke five windows, and punctured a tire. Officers searched the area but were unable to locate defendant. Officers were able to contact defendant by telephone, but he refused to meet with the officers and threatened to shoot them. Days later officers located defendant in his vehicle. Their attempts to conduct a traffic stop failed. Ultimately, officers deployed spike strips, disabling defendant’s vehicle, which collided with the curb. Defendant fled on foot. When officers caught up to defendant, he was attempting to enter a parked car. He then pointed a handgun at his head and threatened to shoot himself. He walked to and entered an empty patrol car. When officers observed defendant raising a weapon, they shot him five times. Officers searched defendant’s vehicle and found a loaded shotgun, shotgun shells, and a black container holding, among other things, methamphetamine and multiple knives. Interviewed by officers at the hospital, defendant admitted abusing
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)