People v. Bennett CA6

Filed 7/28/15 P. v. Bennett CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H040344 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. Nos. C1121262 & C1103796) v.

DAVID BENNETT,

Defendant and Appellant.

STATEMENT OF THE CASE An information charged defendant David Bennett with reckless driving while evading a peace officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a); count 1), carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (former Pen. Code, § 12020, subd. (a)(4); count 2), resisting, delaying, or obstructing a peace officer (Pen. Code, § 148, subd. (a)(1); count 3), being under the influence of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11550, subd. (a); count 4), and driving under the influence of drugs (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a); count 5). The information alleged that defendant committed counts one and two while out of custody on bail (Pen. Code, § 12022.1). The information additionally alleged that defendant had one prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)/1170.12) and had served two prior prison terms (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)).

A jury found defendant guilty on counts one, three, four, and five. The jury was unable to reach a verdict on count two, and the trial court declared a mistrial on that count. In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true the on-bail allegation, the prior strike allegation, and the prior prison term allegations. The trial court sentenced defendant to six years in prison. Defendant now appeals from the judgment of conviction. On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in admitting evidence showing that he was on parole and in possession of a stun gun when he evaded police. As set forth below, we will affirm.1 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS The Prosecution’s Case-in-Chief Santa Clara County Sheriff’s Deputy Chris Reed was patrolling San Jose in a marked patrol car on the afternoon of December 4, 2011. He was driving on Winchester Boulevard, and he saw defendant driving a car with expired registration tags. Deputy Reed turned on the patrol car’s red and blue lights in order to initiate a traffic stop. Defendant did not stop and accelerated to a speed of 40 or 50 miles per hour. Deputy Reed turned on the patrol car’s siren, and defendant increased his speed. Deputy Reed followed defendant, and defendant drove on the road’s shoulder at a speed of 50 to 60 miles per hour. Defendant increased his speed to 90 miles per hour, drove through a red light, and attempted to make a left turn. Defendant’s car fishtailed, hit the median, crashed into a parked car, rolled over completely, and landed in the front yard of an apartment complex.