People v. Garcia CA5

California Court of Appeal Mar 21, 2014 No. F065797Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that certified fingerprint cards are sufficient evidence to prove prior prison term enhancements and that the defendant forfeited his challenge to a fine by failing to object, while also ordering the imposition of mandatory assessments omitted by the trial court.

Issues

Whether certified fingerprint cards are sufficient evidence to prove prior prison term enhancements.
Whether the trial court's imposition of a fine was an unauthorized sentence that could be challenged without a trial court objection.
Whether the trial court erred by failing to impose mandatory court security and operations assessments.

Disposition. modified and affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“A trier of fact is entitled to draw reasonable inferences from certified records offered to prove a defendant suffered a prior conviction and served a prison term.”

“neither case held, as Garcia contends, that the fact of a prior conviction cannot be proved based only on information contained in a certified copy of a fingerprint card.”

Filed 3/21/14 P. v. Garcia CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, F065797

v. (Super. Ct. No. MCR041799)

GREGORY GARCIA, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Ernest J. LiCalsi, Judge. Alex Coolman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Michael A. Canzoneri and Barton Bowers, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

 Before Kane, Acting P.J., Franson, J., and Peña, J.

A jury convicted appellant, Gregory Garcia, of robbery (count 1/Pen. Code, § 211),1 and possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)). The jury also found true a personal use of a firearm enhancement in count 1 (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). In a separate proceeding, the court found true five prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). On September 11, 2012, the court sentenced Garcia to an aggregate term of 20 years eight months, the upper term of five years on his robbery conviction, a 10-year use enhancement in that count, a consecutive eight-month term on Garcia’s possession of a firearm conviction, and five one-year prior prison term enhancements. On appeal, Garcia contends the evidence is insufficient to sustain the court’s true findings with respect to two of the prior prison term enhancements, and 2) the court imposed an unauthorized fine of $870 that must be stricken. Respondent contends the court erred by its failure to impose certain mandatory assessments. We will find merit only to respondent’s contention. FACTS2 On August 23, 2011, Garcia entered the Flores Market in Madera and robbed the owner’s daughter of $150 at gunpoint. The following day, the daughter had her husband call 911 after seeing Garcia in the parking lot of a store in Madera in a truck that resembled the one used in the robbery. Sheriff’s deputies detained Garcia and during an ensuing search of the truck, found a loaded revolver under the center cushion of the truck’s bench seat.

People v. Garcia CA5

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE,

GREGORY GARCIA, OPINION

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief