People v. Ruiz CA5

Filed 1/24/22 P. v. Ruiz 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F080311 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Fresno Super. Ct. No. F08903937) v.

ALEJANDRO RUIZ, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Jonathan B. Conklin, Judge. Allan E. Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

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

INTRODUCTION Appellant Alejandro Ruiz filed a petition to reduce his felony conviction for violating Vehicle Code section 2800.2, subdivision (a),1 evading an officer with willful and wanton disregard for safety, to a misdemeanor. The court denied relief because his offense was not eligible for resentencing pursuant to the provisions of Proposition 47 and Penal Code section 1170.18.2 On appeal, his appellate counsel has filed a brief that summarizes the facts with citations to the record, raises no issues, and asks this court to independently review the record. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We affirm. FACTS3 Around 2:30 a.m. on June 13, 2008, officers with the California Highway Patrol observed appellant traveling on his motorcycle and going through a stoplight. The officers activated the siren and lights on their patrol car and attempted to conduct a traffic stop. Appellant failed to pull over, and instead, accelerated to 70 miles per hour in a 50- mile an hour zone and drove through another red light. Appellant continued to evade the officers and reached speeds of 70 and 80 miles per hour, in a zone marked at 50 miles per hour. Appellant turned into a residential area and went overspeed bumps at 40 miles an hour, and a second set of bumps at 30 miles an hour; the speed limit was 10 miles per hour. He drove through a stop sign, continued for two more miles, and eventually pulled into the driveway and parked at his residence.

1All further citations to “section 2800.2” are to the statute contained in the Vehicle Code. 2 All further citations to “section 1170.18” are to the statute in the Penal Code. 3 It appears a preliminary hearing was held but the transcript is not included in the appellate record. At the plea hearing, the parties stipulated to the police reports for the factual basis of the plea. The following facts are from the police reports, as quoted in the probation report.