People v. Arbuckle CA4/3

Filed 3/24/26 P. v. Arbuckle 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G065361

v. (Super. Ct. No. 20HF1151)

ANDREW AUSTIN ARBUCKLE, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Lance P. Jensen, Judge. Affirmed. Andrew Austin Arbuckle, in pro.per.; and Laura Arnold, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. Andrew Austin Arbuckle appeals from his convictions for felony hit-and-run and driving on a suspended license. After examining the record,

his appointed appellate counsel filed a brief setting forth the facts of the case, raising no issues, and asking this court to independently review the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders). Arbuckle filed a supplemental brief. After independently reviewing the record, we find no arguable issue and affirm the judgment. FACTS Late one evening in summer 2020, Arbuckle hit a man with his truck while driving through a hotel parking lot in Laguna Hills. The man later died from his injuries. Arbuckle was charged with felony hit-and-run (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a) & (b)(2)) and driving on a suspended license (id., § 14601.2, subd. (a)). The information further alleged he had a prior “strike” from 2004 for making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422). Before trial began in June 2024, the trial court explained Arbuckle’s options for the prior; explained his rights to a trial, to confront witnesses, and to testify or not testify; and bifurcated the prior at the defense’s request. Arbuckle pleaded guilty to driving on a suspended license. Trial on the remaining charge ended in a mistrial due to Arbuckle’s health. At the beginning of the second trial in October, the trial court bifurcated the prior allegation again at the defense’s request—Arbuckle and his counsel confirmed that if found guilty, he would either admit the prior or request a court trial. The jury found Arbuckle guilty on the hit-and-run charge. After the verdict, when the trial court asked how Arbuckle would like to proceed on the prior, defense counsel said he would speak with his client. In January 2025, Arbuckle admitted the prior on the record.