People v. Paulton CA2/7

Filed 9/8/14 P. v. Paulton CA2/7

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, B249338

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA407395) v.

MORRIS EUGENE PAULTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ray G. Jurado, Judge. Affirmed.

Mark S. Devore, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Shawn McGahey Webb and Jonathan K. Kline, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

__________________

Morris Eugene Paulton appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted him of automobile burglary. He contends the trial court abused its discretion in denying his motion to dismiss his prior strike convictions. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In January 2013, a public safety officer for the University of Southern California (USC) detained Paulton after noticing him prying open the window of a car parked in a USC-owned lot. Paulton was arrested and charged in an amended information with 1 automobile burglary (Pen. Code, § 459) with special allegations he had suffered three prior serious or violent felony convictions within the meaning of the three strikes law (§§ 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and had served ten separate prison terms for felonies (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Paulton pleaded not guilty and denied the special allegations. A jury found Paulton guilty as charged. In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court granted the People’s motion to dismiss two of the prior prison term allegations, and Paulton admitted all the remaining prior convictions allegations. Prior to sentencing, the trial court indicated it had read and considered the parties’ sentencing memoranda, the probation officer’s report and Paulton’s motion to dismiss the prior strike convictions (§ 1385; People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, 504 (Romero)). In support of the Romero motion, defense counsel argued Paulton’s three prior strike convictions for robbery in 1979 (Texas), 1993 and 2000 were remote; his criminal convictions since 2000 were nonviolent theft and drug-related offenses; he had a history of chronic drug and alcohol abuse; and his current crime was possibly motivated by the presence of a bottle of alcohol in the victim’s car. Counsel urged the court to dismiss the prior convictions and sentence Paulton to the lower term state prison sentence. The prosecutor argued the court should deny the Romero motion and sentence Paulton to the middle term doubled as a second-strike offender, in view of Paulton’s