People v. Brandenburg CA5

California Court of Appeal Apr 27, 2021 No. F079931Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in declining to hold a competency hearing because the defendant's expressions of confusion were attributable to frustration rather than a lack of mental competence, and remanded for the ministerial correction of the abstract of judgment.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred by failing to suspend proceedings for a competency hearing under Penal Code section 1368.
Whether the trial court's failure to include the striking of prison prior enhancements in the abstract of judgment requires remand.

Disposition. affirmed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Since the abstract of judgment should be consistent with the trial court’s oral pronouncement of sentence, we remand for the limited purpose of amending the abstract of judgment to reflect that the two prison priors were stricken.”

Filed 4/27/21 P. v. Brandenburg 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F079931 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F19901296) v.

MICHAEL WAYNE BRANDENBURG, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Adolfo M. Corona, Judge. Elizabeth Campbell, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Catherine Chatman and Angelo S. Edralin, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Franson, Acting P.J., Smith, J. and Snauffer, J.

On March 13, 2019, Michael Wayne Brandenburg was charged in count 1 with felony identity theft (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (a))1, in count 2 with felony forgery (§ 475, subd. (c)); in count 3 with misdemeanor identity theft (§ 530.5, subd. (c)(1)), and in count 4 with misdemeanor shoplifting (§ 459.5, subd. (a)). It was further alleged that Brandenburg served four prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). On May 16, 2019, Brandenburg pled not guilty and denied the associated allegations. On August 7, 2019, pursuant to a negotiated plea, Brandenburg entered a plea of no contest to count 2, forgery, and admitted to serving two prison priors. On September 4, 2019, the trial court sentenced Brandenburg to the middle term of two years and ordered that the two prison priors be stricken. On appeal, Brandenburg contends that the trial court failed to suspend proceedings to hold a competency hearing under section 1368. We affirm, but remand for the limited purpose of amending the abstract of judgment to accurately reflect the oral pronouncement of sentence. STATEMENT OF THE FACTS2 On October 15, 2018, Brandenburg walked into a bank and fraudulently cashed a check belonging to another customer, Eloise B. The check was made out to Brandenburg for $118, but the “pay to” line was not legible. Brandenburg provided information in addition to his right thumbprint and the teller gave Brandenburg $113, as there was a $5 check cashing fee. Later that day, Eloise B. called the bank to report that she had lost two checks earlier in the day, one of which contained the same check number as the one Brandenburg cashed. In April of 2019, Brandenburg was arrested on an unrelated matter. DISCUSSION

People v. Brandenburg CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief