People v. Moore CA3

Filed 3/27/26 P. v. Moore CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C103145

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 21CR000071)

v.

KELLY MULLINS MOORE,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Kelly Mullins Moore pled guilty to theft-related charges and was sentenced to six years four months in prison. In defendant’s first appeal, this court remanded the case for resentencing after concluding the trial court abused its discretion when it found that dismissing a prior serious felony enhancement would endanger public safety (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a); further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code). On remand, the trial court declined to dismiss the enhancement and sentenced defendant to the same term. Defendant timely appeals, claiming the trial court

1

abused its discretion by reimposing the prior serious felony enhancement. We disagree and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The facts underlying defendant’s conviction are detailed in his prior appeal in People v. Moore (Nov. 1, 2023, C097908) [nonpub. opn] (Moore)).1 “An officer saw defendant’s car stopped in front of a storage unit that had been pried open. When officers pulled over defendant and searched the car’s trunk, they found a brass elephant, a tackle box, a tripod, a travel bag, and a Remington .22-caliber rifle. The victim confirmed those items were taken from his storage unit. “The first amended information charged defendant with theft of a firearm, being a felon in possession of a firearm, burglary, vandalism, and receiving stolen property. The information also alleged a five-year prior serious felony enhancement (§ 667, subd. (a)) and a prior serious or violent felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes Law (‘prior strike’). (§§ 667, subd. (b)-(i), [] 1170.12.) “Defendant pled guilty to the theft of a firearm, burglary, and possession of firearm by a felon and admitted the five-year enhancement in exchange for a maximum term of nine years four months and dismissal of the remaining charges, allegation, and two additional cases.” (Moore, supra, C097908.) At sentencing, the trial court declined to strike the prior serious felony enhancement and sentenced defendant to six years four months in prison, consecutive to an aggregate prison term defendant was serving in three other cases. Defendant appealed, and this court concluded the trial court abused its discretion in determining that dismissing the enhancement would endanger public safety. (Moore,