People v. Beckemeyer CA4/1

California Court of Appeal Oct 28, 2020 No. D077262Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by declining to recall the defendant's sentence pursuant to a Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation recommendation, as the statute is permissive and does not require a hearing.

Issues

Whether the trial court abused its discretion by taking no action on a Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation recommendation to recall the defendant's sentence.
Whether the defendant is entitled to the retroactive benefit of an amendment to the prison prior enhancement statute after his judgment became final.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The statute is clearly permissive, not mandatory—it uses the verb “may,” not “shall.””

“The court is not required to hold a hearing on the DCR’s recommendation.”

“Defendant is not entitled to the benefit of this ameliorative amendment because his sentence was final in 2014, well before enactment of the amendment.”

Filed 10/28/20 P. v. Beckemeyer CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D077262

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCE317734)

JOHN ROBERT BECKEMEYER,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, John M. Thompson, Judge. Affirmed.

Bruce L. Kotler, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent. We find no error in this appeal filed pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders). BACKGROUND The parties stipulated to the preliminary hearing transcript as the factual basis for defendant’s plea in the original appeal in this case: People v.

Beckemeyer (2015) 238 Cal.App.4th 461.1 Based on the preliminary hearing, defendant and Linda Ann M. began dating in December of 2011. That relationship ended on January 8, 2012, because Linda felt defendant was extremely controlling and jealous. Linda did not allow defendant to enter her house any longer. However, on January 12, 2012, defendant did come to her house, and confronted her in the bathroom. Defendant refused to leave. He hit her on the head with his fist, knocked her down, repeatedly hit her head on the floor, pulled her hair out of her head, and tried to choke her; stating as he did so, “If I can’t have you, nobody’s going to want you.” When Linda’s adult son came into the bathroom to stop the assault, defendant assaulted him. Defendant knocked down the son, hit him repeatedly with a cane and a rock, and tried to stab him with the sharp metal jagged edge of the cane. Defendant then assaulted Linda again. Officers responding to a 911 call subdued and arrested defendant. (Beckemeyer, at pp. 463–464.) On April 29, 2013, a seven-count information was filed against defendant by the San Diego County District Attorney. The information

People v. Beckemeyer CA4/1

AI Brief

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D077262

JOHN ROBERT BECKEMEYER,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

O'ROURKE, J.

GUERRERO, J.

AI Brief