People v. Shipp CA3

Filed 6/28/21 P. v. Shipp CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Placer) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C090454

v. (Super. Ct. No. 62158170)

CHRISTOPHER LEE SHIPP,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Christopher Lee Shipp guilty of residential burglary and resisting a peace officer, and the trial court found true various prior strike conviction allegations. Defendant now contends the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion to dismiss one of the prior strike allegations. Finding no abuse of discretion, we will affirm the judgment. BACKGROUND In 2018, defendant broke into, and entered, the victim’s home while the victim was away. His entry triggered an alarm, which summoned sheriff’s deputies. When the deputies approached the house, they saw defendant walk into the living room holding a

1

rake. One of the deputies identified himself as law enforcement and defendant ran away. Law enforcement apprehended defendant as he fled. Defendant spoke to a detective shortly after he was arrested. Defendant explained he had taken six or seven “bars” of Xanax the night before and felt high. He admitted breaking into the house to look for “[a]nything and money.” Defendant explained that before he went into the house, he “walk[ed] around the place” and knocked on the door to check if anyone was home. The prosecution charged defendant with one count of residential burglary (Pen. Code, § 459)1 and one count of resisting a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). The prosecution also alleged defendant had two prior convictions for serious felonies from 2005: one for assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)) in Sacramento County, and one for attempted burglary (§§ 664, subd. (a), 459) in Placer County. (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12.) Defendant moved to dismiss the serious felony allegations under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero), but the trial court denied the motion after considering “defendant’s present felony and the prior strikes and the particulars of his background, character, and prospects and what the Court considers a just result.” At the beginning of trial, defendant moved for reconsideration of the motion. The trial court deferred the motion until after trial. The jury found defendant guilty of both counts and the trial court found the prior strike allegations true. Defendant renewed his Romero motion and the trial court held a hearing on the motion. Among other things, defense counsel referenced defendant’s family, his difficulties with substance abuse, and his efforts to seek help, arguing those circumstances supported dismissing the strike. Defendant also spoke, as did an advocate from a substance abuse treatment program who had worked with defendant.