People v. Santana CA2/8

Filed 8/26/20 P. v. Santana CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B304541

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA115259) v.

JUAN SANTANA,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Mike Camacho, Judge. Affirmed. Brad Kaiserman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_________________________

In this third appeal, Juan Santana challenges the trial court’s refusal to strike the firearm enhancement at his resentencing hearing. Santana’s appointed counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Santana filed a supplemental brief raising two issues which we decided in his previous appeal. We affirm the judgment. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This case arose from the shooting death of Patricia Salva in her home. In the days after her death but before her body was discovered, Santana, his son, and his girlfriend returned to Salva’s home several times to steal various items, many of which were recovered from Santana’s car or his ex-wife’s house. At closing, defense counsel conceded the evidence demonstrated Santana’s guilt on burglary, receiving stolen property, and second degree murder, but urged the jury to acquit him of first degree murder and to find the personal use firearm enhancements not true. He did not consult Santana before taking that course, believing it was a strategic choice within his control. The jury found Santana guilty of second degree murder, second degree burglary, and receiving stolen property. In connection with the second degree murder count, the jury found true the firearm enhancements pursuant to Penal Code section 12022.53, subdivisions (b)-(d).1 The trial court imposed a determinate term of three years for the second degree burglary conviction, stayed the sentence for the conviction for receiving stolen property, and imposed an indeterminate term of 15 years to life for the second degree murder conviction. The court also