People v. Conners CA2/5

California Court of Appeal Apr 1, 2014 No. B247491Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court properly imposed separate sentences for multiple counts of resisting arrest because the defendant formed a new and independent intent to resist each officer he encountered. The court also declined to address the defendant's challenge to custody credits because the issue was not properly before the court on appeal.

Issues

Whether Penal Code section 654 requires staying sentences for multiple counts of resisting arrest arising from a single pursuit.
Whether the appellate court may review a challenge to presentence custody credits when the defendant failed to appeal the trial court's postjudgment order denying a motion for correction.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“At each juncture, defendant had the opportunity to surrender himself and end the pursuit. He decided not to do so repeatedly, and that conduct renders him more culpable than a person resisting only one officer.”

Filed 4/1/14 P. v. Conners CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B247491

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA404162) v.

ENOCH CONNERS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ronald S. Coen, Judge. Affirmed. Paul R. Kraus, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr., Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Allison H. Chung, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

________________________________

The jury convicted defendant and appellant Enoch Conners of two counts of first degree burglary (Pen. Code § 459)1 (counts 1 and 2) and six counts of misdemeanor resisting arrest (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)) (counts 4-9). He was found not guilty of first degree burglary (§ 459) in count 3. The trial court sentenced defendant to seven years four months in state prison, plus two years in county jail, consisting of the upper term of six years in count 1, a consecutive term of sixteen months in count 2 (one-third the mid-term), consecutive terms of one year in county jail on counts 4 and 6, and concurrent terms of one year in county jail on counts 5, 7, 8, and 9. Defendant was awarded 603 presentence custody credits and 90 days of conduct credit. Defendant contends that five of his six sentences for misdemeanor resisting arrest must be stayed under section 654, and the trial court erred in its calculation of presentence custody credits and conduct credits. We affirm.

People v. Conners CA2/5

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B247491

ENOCH CONNERS,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

FACTS

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

KRIEGLER, J.

TURNER, P. J. MOSK, J.

AI Brief