People v. Barksdale CA3

Filed 11/20/20 P. v. Barksdale CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C088650

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 15F01970)

v.

MARQUESHA BARKSDALE,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Marquesha Barksdale appeals a judgment entered following the jury’s verdicts that she committed robbery (Pen. Code, § 211),1 petty theft (§ 484, subd. (a)), and battery (§ 242). She argues that because petty theft is a lesser included offense of robbery, her petty theft conviction must be stricken by this court. Defendant further

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

requests the fees associated with her petty theft conviction be stricken as well. The People concur with defendant’s requests. We agree that defendant’s conviction for petty theft cannot stand. Accordingly, we will modify the judgment to vacate that conviction and its associated fees. BACKGROUND The People’s amended information charged defendant with robbery (§ 211—count one), petty theft (§ 484, subd. (a)—count two), and battery (§ 242—count three). The matter was tried to a jury, who found her guilty on all counts. All convictions arose from a single incident wherein defendant struggled with and bit a security officer who stopped her outside a store in an attempt to recover merchandise defendant had concealed and taken from the store without payment. Defendant was ultimately detained by a second security officer. The court placed defendant on probation for a term of five years with 240 days in county jail. The court then imposed sentences of 240 days for both counts two and three, which it stayed pursuant to section 654. The court also imposed various fines and fees, including the complained of $30 conviction assessment fee (Gov. Code, § 70373), and the $40 court operations assessment fee (§ 1465.8) associated with defendant’s petty theft conviction. The court later modified the judgment to stay certain of these fines and fees pending a determination of defendant’s ability to pay.2 Defendant timely appealed her judgment of conviction.