People v. Bradford CA5

Filed 11/4/21 P. v. Bradford 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F081464 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Kings Super. Ct. No. 19CM6042) v.

RAYMOND BRADFORD, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kings County. Robert Shane Burns, Judge. Sara E. Coppin, 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 Michael Dolida, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P. J., Poochigian, J. and Detjen, J.

INTRODUCTION Appellant and defendant Raymond Bradford, a state prison inmate, was sentenced to two years after being convicted of battery upon correctional officers. On appeal, he contends the court improperly imposed a restitution fine and other fees without determining his ability to pay those amounts in violation of People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueñas). We affirm. FACTS On April 11 and 12, 2019, defendant was inside his prison cell and threw fecal matter at two different correctional officers. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On December 13, 2019, a complaint was filed in the Superior Court of Kings County charging defendant with counts 1 and 2, felony battery by a prisoner on a nonconfined person (Pen. Code, § 4501.5)1, with three prior strike convictions. Plea On March 25, 2020, the court arraigned defendant on the complaint and granted his motion to represent himself pursuant to Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806.2 The court stated defendant’s “out date” was 2027, and the prosecution had offered an aggregate term of two years for both counts. Thereafter, defendant waived a preliminary hearing and pleaded no contest to both felony counts, and the court dismissed the prior strike convictions.

1 All further statutory citations are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. 2In his appellate briefing, defendant states he was represented by appointed counsel at trial. At defendant’s first appearance, however, he declined the court’s appointment of counsel and instead moved to represent himself pursuant to Faretta. The court conducted the requisite hearing and granted the motion.