People v. Romero CA5

Filed 3/4/15 P. v. Romero 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F067385 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. VCF242397) v.

JUAN CARLOS ROMERO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Patrick J. O’Hara, Gary L. Paden, and Brett R. Alldredge, Judges. Gordon S. Brownell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Cornell, Acting P.J., Kane, J. and Poochigian, J.

INTRODUCTION A jury convicted appellant Juan Carlos Romero of forcible sodomy; the jury was unable to reach a verdict on a charge of rape and on special allegations alleged pursuant to Penal Code section 667.61.1 A mistrial was declared and the People announced their intent to retry Romero. Romero was granted the right to represent himself at the retrial pursuant to Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806. While Romero was representing himself, the case was settled pursuant to a negotiated disposition. Romero filed a notice of appeal and requested a certificate of probable cause, which was denied. Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On September 23, 2010, a felony complaint was filed charging Romero with forcible sodomy (count 1), a violation of section 286, subdivision (c)(2), forcible rape (count 2), a violation of section 261, subdivision (a)(2), and alleging special enhancements as to both counts pursuant to section 667.61, subdivisions (a), (b), (d), and (e). The complaint alleged the offenses were committed on or about June 12, 2001. Romero pled not guilty and denied the special allegations. On September 24, 2010, Romero filed a motion to withdraw his plea and demur to the complaint, alleging that the statute of limitations had expired. Romero asserted the applicable statute of limitations was six years. The People opposed the demurrer and asserted that section 801.1, subdivision (b) applied, which states:

“Notwithstanding any other limitation of time described in this chapter, … prosecution for a felony offense described in subdivision (c) of Section 290 shall be commenced within 10 years after commission of the offense.” Section 290, subdivision (c) includes offenses committed pursuant to sections 261, subdivision (a)(2), and 286. The trial court denied the motion.