People v. Perozzi CA3

Filed 9/8/14 P. v. Perozzi CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C074508

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. NCR84530)

v.

ROBERT LLOYD PEROZZI,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Robert Lloyd Perozzi appeals from a judgment of seven years in state prison after a jury convicted him of one count of corporal injury on a cohabitant plus his admission to having served three separate prior prison terms. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion when it refused to allow him to plead to a previously offered misdemeanor. We reject the contention and shall affirm the judgment.

1

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1

On April 4, 2013, the District Attorney of Tehama County filed an information charging defendant with two felony counts of corporal injury on a cohabitant (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a)—counts I & II)2 and alleging the service of three prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).

On June 6, 2013, the first day of defendant’s jury trial, outside of the jury’s presence, the court stated its understanding that defendant intended to admit the three prior convictions; defendant’s counsel affirmed that this was so. The court stated that before defendant made any admissions, it wanted placed “on the record the offers that were made in this case.”

The prosecutor stated that earlier in the week the People had extended to defendant an offer for him to plead to one of the two counts as a misdemeanor, but that offer was rejected by the court “because three pretrial conferences have already occurred in this case.”3 Also discussed at that time had been an offer for defendant to plead to a felony violation of one of the counts in exchange for dismissing the prison priors, stipulating to two years in prison, and the dismissal of another case, but that offer was rejected by defendant. Defendant acknowledged that he was not willing to accept “any of those offers.” The court then took defendant’s admissions to the three prior convictions and the People moved to dismiss count II.4 A jury was then selected, evidence was taken, and on June 7, 2013, the jury convicted defendant as charged.