People v. Washington CA2/4
Filed 7/28/15 P. v. Washington CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR
THE PEOPLE, B259326
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. GA031084) v.
NATHANIEL WASHINGTON,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William C. Ryan, Judge. Affirmed. Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Paul M. Roadarmel, Jr., and Nima Razfar, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________________
Nathaniel Washington appeals from an order denying his petition to recall his sentence under the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012, added by Proposition 36. (Pen. Code, § 1170.126).1 He contends the trial court erred in finding him ineligible because he was armed with a deadly weapon during the commission of the current offense: carrying a concealed dirk or dagger. We find no error and affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY In 1995, appellant was involved in an altercation with another man in a liquor store. The man, who shoved appellant, suffered several stab wounds in the ensuing fight. A store worker broke up the fight and pulled a sharpened metal rod with a wrapped handle from appellant’s hand. Based on this incident, in 1997, appellant was charged with attempted murder (§§ 187, subd. (a), 664), assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), and felony carrying a concealed dirk or dagger (former § 12020, subd. (a), now § 21310). Four prior strike convictions were alleged. Appellant was convicted by jury solely of carrying a concealed dirk or dagger. The court found the prior strikes to be true and sentenced appellant to an indeterminate term of 25 years to life under the Three Strikes law. The judgment was affirmed in People v. Washington (Nov. 16, 1998, No. B117501 [unpub. opn.]). In 2012, appellant petitioned for a recall of his sentence. The prosecutor opposed the petition on the grounds that appellant was neither eligible nor suitable for resentencing. Specifically, the prosecutor argued appellant was ineligible because he was “armed with a . . . deadly weapon” “[d]uring the commission of the current offense.” (§§ 667, subd. (e)(2)(C)(iii); 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)(C)(iii); 1170.126, subd. (e)(2).) The court denied the petition after a hearing. This appeal followed.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)