People v. Belton CA3

Filed 2/22/21 P. v. Belton CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C090374

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 19FE002634)

v.

RONALD LEE BELTON, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Ronald Lee Belton, Jr., guilty of attempted burglary. In a bifurcated proceeding, defendant admitted one prior conviction under the three strikes law and five prior convictions with prison terms under section 667.5, subdivision (b). On appeal, he contends: (1) insufficient evidence supports his conviction for attempted burglary because he never took a direct but ineffectual step toward burglarizing the house; and (2) the prior prison term enhancements must be vacated based on the retroactive application of Senate Bill No. 136 (Senate Bill 136). We will direct the trial

1

court to strike defendant’s prior prison term enhancements. We otherwise affirm the judgment.

FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Maria G. and other members of her family owned a rental house on Riverside Boulevard in Sacramento. On February 9, 2019, the house was vacant, and Maria G. was renovating it in preparation for putting it on the rental market. That day, they washed the windows and reinstalled the screens. The screens were installed from inside the house. The screens had no dents, pry marks, or other damage. At about 6:00 that evening, Maria G. locked the doors and windows and left. The next day between about 8:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m., Eloisa M. was walking on Riverside Boulevard when she saw a man at the side gate of Maria G.’s house. When the man saw Eloisa M., he dropped his hand from the latch on the gate and leaned onto a garbage or recycling bin. Eloisa M. did not get a good look at the man, but she noticed he was about five feet, nine inches tall and was wearing loose pants and a jacket with a fake fur collar. Eloisa M. continued walking to the end of the block and then ran home to get her husband, Dan M. Eloisa M. and Dan M. then got in their car, drove to Maria G.’s house, and parked in front of it. Five minutes had passed, at most, since Eloisa M. had walked past the house. The man she had previously seen was still at the house. Dan M. identified him at trial as defendant. Eloisa M. and Dan M. remained in their car and observed for about 15 minutes. During that time, defendant climbed onto a blue recycling bin and tried to climb over the fence but fell. Dan M. called 911 and told the operator that a man was climbing the fence at Maria G.’s address and trying to get into the backyard. After telling someone at a neighboring house about what they had seen, Eloisa M. and Dan M. left for church. Dexter M. lived next door to Maria G.’s house. At approximately 8:00 or 9:00 on the morning of February 10th, someone came to his door and told him about something