People v. Hulsey CA3
Filed 10/7/20 P. v. Hulsey CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Shasta) ----
THE PEOPLE, C090855
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 19F6091)
v.
CARL DUDLEY HULSEY III,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appointed counsel for defendant Carl Dudley Hulsey III has filed an opening brief setting forth the facts of the case and asking this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal that would result in a judgment more favorable to defendant. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) After reviewing the entire record, we modify the judgment to dismiss all outstanding counts which should have been dismissed pursuant to the plea agreement and direct correction of the corresponding minute order. We affirm as modified.
1
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND When defendant’s wife of four years tried to enter their residence, defendant slammed the door on her foot and punched her repeatedly. Wife’s sister tried to help wife and defendant repeatedly punched her in the face, hit her in the head with a brick, and choked her. Defendant eventually ran from law enforcement officers to evade arrest. He was charged with nine counts with one added for the plea and pleaded guilty to three counts: 1) corporal injury to a spouse (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a))1 with a serious bodily injury enhancement (§ 12022.7, subd. (e)); 2) assault with force likely to cause great bodily injury (§ 245, subd. (a)(4)) with a great bodily injury enhancement (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)); and 3) resisting arrest (§ 148). Pursuant to the plea agreement, the remaining seven counts were to be dismissed. The trial court sentenced defendant to the agreed-upon term of 11 years in prison: four years on the spousal abuse charge with an additional five years on the associated bodily injury enhancement, a consecutive one year on the assault charge and an additional one year on the associated bodily injury enhancement, and a concurrent one year on the resisting arrest charge. The court imposed a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)), an identical stayed parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45), a $40 per felony count court operations assessment (§ 1465.8), and a $30 per felony count criminal conviction assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). The court awarded defendant a total of 16 days of presentence custody credit but failed to dismiss the remaining counts and allegations. The court later denied defendant’s request for a certificate of probable cause and increased the number of custody credits by one day.
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)