People v. Hicks CA5

Filed 6/29/21 P. v. Hicks 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F080315 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. F19903067, v. F18903940)

DONNIE TERRELLE HICKS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Wayne R. Ellison, Judge. (Retired Judge of the Fresno County Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Jared G. Coleman, 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, Darren K. Indermill and Edrina Anderson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

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

Defendant Donnie Terrelle Hicks stands convicted of possession of a firearm by a felon. He contends on appeal that (1) the abstract of judgment fails to accurately reflect the trial court’s oral pronouncement of judgment and (2) the trial court did not correctly award custody credits. The People agree that the abstract of judgment contains a clerical error but contend that custody credits were properly calculated. We order the abstract of judgment corrected and modify the award of custody credits. As modified, we affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On May 13, 2019,1 the Fresno County District Attorney filed a complaint in case No. F19903067 charging defendant with possession of a firearm by a felon (Pen. Code, § 29800, subd. (a)(1);2 count 1) and carrying a loaded firearm in public (§ 25850, subd. (a); count 2), both on May 9. The complaint further alleged defendant had suffered a prior serious felony “strike” conviction within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, subds. (b)–(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d)) and had served two prior prison terms based on four prior convictions (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Defendant was also charged by the Fresno County District Attorney in case No. F18903940 with possession of a firearm by a felon on June 12, 2018. The charging document alleged that defendant had suffered a prior strike conviction. On August 16, as part of a negotiated plea agreement, defendant pled no contest to possession of a firearm by a felon in case Nos. F19903067 and F18903940 and admitted having suffered a prior strike conviction in both cases. Defendant’s plea was made in exchange for dismissal of all other charges and all remaining special allegations, and an indicated term of four years as follows: in case No. F19903067, 16 months (one-third of the middle term doubled due to the prior strike conviction); in case No. F18903940,