People v. Salgado CA4/3

Filed 1/22/26 P. v. Salgado CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G064232

v. (Super. Ct. No. 18CF2175)

ISMAEL FIGUEROA SALGADO, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Steven D. Bromberg, Judge. Affirmed as modified in part, vacated in part, and remanded with directions. Kessler & Seecof, and Daniel J. Kessler, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Daniel

Rogers and Alana Cohen Butler, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * * After a jury convicted Ismael Figueroa Salgado of one count of kidnapping to commit a sex offense and five counts of forcible rape, he was sentenced to 25-years-to-life on one of the forcible rape counts, plus concurrent life terms on the remaining counts. The trial court also dismissed all fines and fees, although the abstract of judgment shows imposition of two $200 restitution fines. Salgado appeals, contending his sentence on the kidnapping to commit a sex offense count should be stayed because that count and the forcible rape count constituted a single criminal act. Respondent agrees. We accept respondent’s concession. Salgado also contends the abstract of judgment should be corrected to reflect that no restitution fines were imposed. Respondent disagrees and argues the dismissal of the fines was unauthorized. We conclude respondent forfeited this sentencing challenge. Accordingly, we affirm the convictions, and remand for the court to stay the sentence on the kidnapping count and correct the abstract of judgment to reflect that no restitution fines were imposed. STATEMENT OF THE CASE On October 31, 2018, the Orange County District Attorney filed an information charging Salgado and codefendant Jose Plascencia, in count 1, with kidnapping to commit a sex offense in violation of Penal Code section 1 209, subdivision (b)(1), and in counts 2 through 6, with forcible rape in violation of section 261, subdivision (a)(2). As to each of the forcible rape