People v. Gallegos CA1/4

Filed 3/3/21 P. v. Gallegos CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A161061 v. RAYMOND CARLOS GALLEGOS, (Del Norte County Super. Ct. No. CRPB19-5141) Defendant and Appellant.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant Raymond Carlos Gallegos pled guilty to a felony charge of assault with deadly weapon by a prisoner in violation of Penal Code1 section 4501, subdivision (a) and admitted the enhancement allegations that he personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) and had one prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)). In exchange for his plea, defendant agreed to a sentence of fourteen years, consisting of the upper term of six years on the assault charge, three consecutive years for infliction of great bodily injury, five consecutive years for the prior serious felony conviction. An additional charge of attempted murder (§ 664, § 187, subd. (a)), two additional counts of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 4500, § 4501, subd. (b)) and a charge of unlawful possession of a weapon (§ 4502, subd. (a)) were dismissed in connection with the plea agreement.

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.

1

Defendant’s counsel has filed an opening brief asking that this court conduct an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Counsel has informed defendant that he has the right to file a supplemental brief on his own behalf, which defendant has not done. We conclude there are no meritorious issues that require further briefing and affirm the judgment. Background At the plea hearing, counsel offered the following factual basis for the plea: “On September 17th, 2018, this defendant was an inmate at Pelican Bay State Prison, serving a life sentence. He ran from his cell . . . into the victim’s cell . . . as the cell doors were being opened for morning yard release. . . . [¶] The defendant ran into that cell with a weapon [and] began stabbing [the victim] numerous times. The victim was seen trying to crawl away from the attack. [Pepper] spray had to be used at which time the defendant stopped. A bloody weapon was found near the defendant . . . . The victim did lose consciousness as well as loss of all pulse for a while. Life-saving measures were used, and he was taken by ambulance to Sutter Coast Hospital.” Discussion Defendant was properly advised before entering his plea and stipulating to a factual basis for the plea. While entering his plea, defendant questioned whether sentencing on the prior serious felony enhancement amounted to “double jeopardy or something like that.” The court correctly explained that the enhancement did not punish defendant again for the prior crime but added time to his sentence for the current crime because defendant “didn’t remain free of criminal conduct.” Defendant confirmed that he understood and would admit the section 667, subdivision (a) enhancement.