People v. Tafoya CA3

Filed 6/17/14 P. v. Tafoya CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C075143

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. SF121804A)

v.

ANGELA RENEE TAFOYA,

Defendant and Appellant.

This appeal comes to us pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). On August 22, 2012, defendant was seen in a local Walmart store. With defendant were two older children, an infant in a stroller, and another child in a shopping cart. Sharita Sheard, an asset protection associate at Walmart, saw defendant tear “UPC tags” off of merchandise and hide the merchandise in a diaper bag attached to the back of her stroller.

1

Sheard followed defendant around the store and watched defendant conceal numerous other items including but not limited to: toys, clothing, live fish from the pet department, Enfamil baby formula, and music CD’s. Sheard then watched defendant as she stood in the McDonald’s inside the Walmart; defendant was watching the front door. After about 15 minutes, defendant walked out the door with her shopping cart and all the stolen merchandise. Sheard stopped defendant and brought her back inside the store. Along with two other associates, Sheard found more than 70 stolen items, totaling $495. Sheard contacted the police (despite defendant’s pleas) and defendant was later charged with two counts of petty theft with three or more prior theft convictions. (Pen. Code, § 666.)1 The People further alleged defendant was previously convicted of a serious or violent felony. (§§ 1170.12, subd. (b), 667, subd. (d).) Defendant’s competence was subsequently declared in doubt and criminal proceedings were suspended pursuant to section 1368. Two physicians were appointed to examine defendant pursuant to section 1369; they both declared her competent to stand trial. Defendant and the People then stipulated to defendant’s competence, and criminal proceedings were reinstated. Defendant later pleaded guilty to one count of petty theft with priors. She also admitted to serving at least one day of incarceration for five prior theft convictions, admitted she was previously convicted of a strike offense, and admitted she violated her probation in San Joaquin County case Nos. SF115793A and SF117353A. The remaining charge and allegations were dismissed. The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of four years in state prison, awarded her 518 days of custody credits, and ordered her to pay various fines and