People v. Turner CA2/6

Filed 3/24/15 P. v. Turner CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B252898 (Super. Ct. No. TA127946) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

DAVID TURNER,

Defendant and Appellant.

David Turner appeals after a jury convicted him of evading a police officer with willful disregard for safety (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) and resisting an executive officer in the performance of his duties (Pen. Code,1 § 69). After the verdicts were returned, appellant admitted a prior serious or violent felony conviction (§§ 667, subd. (a), 1170.12, subd. (b)), and serving five prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced him to six years four months in state prison, consisting of the midterm of two years on the evading count doubled for the strike prior, a consecutive eight-month term on the resisting count doubled for the strike prior, plus a one-year consecutive term for one of his prison priors.

1 All further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Appellant contends he was sentenced on both counts in violation of section 654. He also asks us to independently review the record on his Pitchess2 motion. We affirm. STATEMENT OF FACTS Los Angeles Police Officers Gerardo Perez and Francisco Zaragoza were on patrol when they saw appellant driving erratically. Officer Perez activated his emergency light and sirens and pursued appellant as he led them on a 10-minute high- speed police chase. During the chase appellant ran stop signs and red lights, drove onto front lawns, and drove the wrong way down a one-way street. Appellant's vehicle eventually came to a stop after he hit a gate. He got out of his vehicle and ran away. He climbed to the top of a tall chain-link fence and jumped to the ground on the other side, breaking both of his ankles. The officers followed appellant on foot and were also injured as they went over the fence. Appellant was found lying on the ground near a shed. He appeared as if he were about to get up and run away, so Officer Zaragoza placed his knee on appellant's back to restrain him. Appellant tried to strike the officers with his elbows and did not comply with their orders to stop resisting and show his hands. He flailed his arms, legs and elbows and continued trying to hit the officers as Officer Perez attempted to handcuff him. Appellant eventually stopped struggling and was handcuffed. DISCUSSION Section 654 Appellant contends the court violated section 654's proscription against multiple punishment by sentencing him for both evading a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) and resisting an executive officer in the performance of his duties (§ 69). He claims that sentencing on the resisting charge should have been stayed