People v. Jackson CA3

Filed 7/28/15 P. v. Jackson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C076206

v. (Super. Ct. No. 13F02964)

ANTOINE JACKSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury convicted defendant Antoine Jackson of assault with a deadly weapon, negligent discharge of a firearm, possession of a firearm within 10 years of a domestic violence conviction, second degree robbery, fraudulent use of another’s identity, and carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle. The jury also found true various firearm enhancements. The trial court designated count 2 (assault with a deadly weapon) as the principal term and sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 27 years in state prison.

1

Defendant now contends the matter must be remanded for resentencing so that the trial court can exercise its discretion in applying Penal Code section 1170.11 (designating the principal and subordinate terms). Although defendant’s trial counsel did not object in the trial court to the trial court’s sentencing designation, defendant claims we should reach the issue because his counsel was ineffective for failing to object. Defendant also contends that he is entitled to eight days of additional presentence credit. The People agree with defendant’s contentions. We conclude defendant’s first contention lacks merit, but we agree that he is entitled to eight additional days of presentence credit. We will modify the judgment to award defendant 342 days of presentence credit (298 actual days and 44 conduct days), and we will affirm the judgment as modified. BACKGROUND In light of the limited nature of defendant’s claims, a detailed recitation of the facts underlying his convictions is unnecessary. Additional background regarding sentencing will be set forth in the discussion as relevant to the contentions on appeal. A jury found defendant guilty of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (b) -- count 2), negligent discharge of a firearm (§ 246.3 -- count 3), two counts of possession of a firearm within 10 years of a domestic violence conviction (§ 29805 -- counts 4 and 11), three counts of second degree robbery (§ 211 -- counts 5, 7, and 8), fraudulent use of another’s identity (§ 530.5, subd. (a) -- count 6), and carrying a concealed firearm in a vehicle (§ 25400, subd. (a)(1) -- count 9). The jury also found true the following special allegations: as to count 2, that defendant personally used a semi-automatic firearm (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)); as to counts 7 and 8, that defendant personally used a firearm