People v. Lewis CA5

Filed 8/7/14 P. v. Lewis CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F066495 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. MCR035047A) v.

MELVIN CHARLES LEWIS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Ernest J. LiCalsi, Judge. Barbara Michel, 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, Louis M. Vasquez and Leanne Le Mon, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Kane, Acting P.J., Detjen, J., and Franson, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellant and defendant, Melvin Charles Lewis, was charged in an amended information filed on September 3, 2010, with transporting cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a), count 1) and possessing cocaine base for the purpose of sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5, count 2). The amended information further alleged that defendant had two prior convictions within the meaning of Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (a) and a prior prison term enhancement (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Defendant’s first trial ended on October 14, 2010, with a mistrial. Defendant’s retrial began on October 1, 2012. On October 3, 2012, the trial court denied defendant’s motion for a mistrial. On October 9, 2012, the jury convicted defendant of both counts. In a bifurcated proceeding, defendant waived his constitutional rights and admitted the enhancement allegations. On January 4, 2013, the trial court sentenced defendant to a total term of 11 years in county jail. Defendant was awarded 289 days of presentence custody credits. Defendant contends on appeal that the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion for mistrial based on the arresting officer’s reference to prior narcotics convictions. The trial court advised the jury with instructions to disregard the officer’s testimony in this regard. We affirm the judgment. FACTS Execution of Search Warrant on Defendant’s Residence Madera Police Officer Shant Sheklanian has significant training and experience with narcotics trafficking, sales, and possession. Sheklanian is cross-deputized as a federal marshal with the Fugitive Apprehension Team, has experience working with the Drug Enforcement Administration, and is a member of the Community Response Unit (CRU). Sheklanian’s partner, Officer Jason Gutknecht, is also well trained in drug