People v. Anderson CA3

Filed 3/4/22 P. v. Anderson CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE, C093934

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 17F3799, 18F8075, 19F1009) v.

STONEY ALLEN ANDERSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Stoney Allen Anderson filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and asks this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) We ordered supplemental briefing regarding two perceived sentencing errors; the parties agree in their briefing that the record evinces errors and that the case should be remanded with directions to the trial court to rectify these errors. Accordingly, we will remand the case for resentencing with directions and otherwise affirm the judgment.

1

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This case returns to us after we previously remanded the case for resentencing. (People v. Anderson (July 17, 2020, C090268) [nonpub. opn.] (Anderson).) In our previous opinion, we summarized the three cases that were at issue in the appeal, saying: “This appeal involves three different cases. In case No. 17F3799, defendant pleaded no contest to inflicting corporal injury on a dating partner (Pen. Code, § 273.5, subd. (a); count one)1 and assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1); count two). In case No. 18F8075, a jury found defendant guilty of two counts of inflicting corporal injury on a dating partner. (§ 273.5, subd. (a); counts one and two.) The court found true an allegation of a prior prison term for a 2012 conviction for receiving a stolen motor vehicle (§ 496, subd. (d)) under section 667.5, subdivision (b). The court also found true multiple allegations of prior convictions in case No. 17F3799. In case No. 19F1009, defendant pleaded no contest to one misdemeanor count of preventing or dissuading a witness from testifying. (§ 136.1, subd. (a)(1).) [¶] The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 13 years eight months in state prison, including one year for the prior prison term enhancement.” (Anderson, C090268.) Defendant appealed, asserting the prior prison term enhancement should be vacated because of the passage of Senate Bill No. 136 (2019-2020 Reg. Sess.) and challenging the fines and fees the court purportedly imposed at sentencing. (Anderson, supra, C090268.) We struck the enhancement and remanded the case for a full resentencing in light of the changed circumstances. (Ibid.) As to the fines and fees, we observed the trial court had neglected to impose any fines and fees in its oral pronouncement, and directed the trial court to consider the issue of fines and fees on remand. (Ibid.)