People v. Bradley CA3

Filed 12/30/25 P. v. Bradley CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Tehama) ----

THE PEOPLE, C102179

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 24CR001122)

v.

JONATHAN SMITH BRADLEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jonathan Smith Bradley pled guilty to kidnapping after taking his son from the home where his son lived with his legal guardian. In a statement to his probation officer after the crime, defendant explained that he had been molested as a child and was concerned that his son was having a similar experience. He said that he “felt he needed to go get [his son] because he was ‘high’ at the time” and would not have “done what [he] did if [he] wasn’t on methamphetamines.” The trial court sentenced defendant to the middle term of five years.

1

On appeal, defendant contends that his statement to the probation officer triggered the lower term presumption under Penal Code1 section 1170, subdivision (b)(6)(A) and the trial court abused its discretion by failing to consider the lower term under this provision. However, defense counsel did not request the lower term under section 1170, subdivision (b)(6)(A). Despite this, defendant claims he did not forfeit the issue and, in any event, his attorney was ineffective for failing to make the request. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Around 2:19 a.m. on May 25, 2024, defendant went to the home where his son lived with a legal guardian. After pressing the doorbell a few times and unsuccessfully trying to open the door, defendant walked over to a window and broke in. Defendant took his son and drove away. Defendant pled guilty to kidnapping. In a statement to his probation officer, defendant said, “ ‘I wouldn’t have done what I did if I wasn’t on methamphetamines.’ ” He explained that he was molested by a family member when he was a “kid” and thought something similar was happening with his son; he “felt he needed to go get [his son] because he was ‘high’ at the time.” Defendant did not elaborate further. At sentencing, defendant asked for the lower term “due to an early resolution, [defendant’s] admission, and cooperation with law enforcement officers.” The prosecution requested “the maximum amount of time that the [c]ourt [was] willing to grant” based on defendant’s criminal history and his lack of success with rehab and probation. The trial court sentenced defendant to the middle term of five years. Defendant appeals.