People v. Gonzalez CA5

Filed 4/1/21 P. v. Gonzalez CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F078988 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. BF170046A & v. BF171143A)

ALEJANDRO JAVIER GONZALEZ, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. John S. Somers, Judge. J. Edward Jones, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P.J., Franson, J. and Meehan, J.

Appointed counsel for defendant Alejandro Javier Gonzalez asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. Although we granted defendant an extension of time to file a brief, he ultimately did not do so. Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm. BACKGROUND On October 18, 2017, defendant, a felon, was stopped by police for riding a bicycle on the wrong side of the street without proper lighting. In a chase that ensued, defendant discarded an operational but unloaded handgun. Methamphetamine and a glass pipe were found on his person. On February 1, 2018, defendant robbed an employee at an illegal internet casino at gunpoint. Police arrived and arrested defendant. His gun was operable and loaded. In case No. BF170046A, on January 29, 2019, defendant pled no contest to possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1);1 count 1) and misdemeanor resisting arrest (§ 148, subd. (a)(1); count 3). Defendant admitted having suffered a prior “strike” conviction within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)–(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d)). The same day, in case No. BF171143A, a jury found defendant guilty of robbery (§ 212.5, subd. (c); count 1), criminal threats (§ 422; count 2), and possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29900, subd. (a); count 3). As to count 1, the jury found true the allegation that defendant personally used a firearm in the commission of the crime (§ 12022.53, subd. (a)). As to all counts, the jury found not true the allegations that defendant committed the offenses to benefit a gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). In a