People v. Randle CA3

Filed 5/25/22 P. v. Randle CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (San Joaquin) ----

THE PEOPLE, C093391

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. LOD-CR-FE- COD-2019-0001552) v.

DARNELL WILLIAM RANDLE,

Defendant and Appellant.

Following a court trial, defendant Darnell William Randle was found guilty of second degree robbery and allegations of multiple prior serious felony convictions were found true. Defendant was sentenced to 15 years in state prison based on the upper term of five years for second degree robbery, doubled for a prior strike, plus five years for another prior conviction.

1

While defendant’s appeal was pending, Penal Code section 11701 was amended by Senate Bill No. 567 (Stats. 2021, ch. 731, § 1.3) (Senate Bill No. 567). Both parties agree Senate Bill No. 567 applies retroactively to defendant’s case, but they disagree on whether remand is necessary. We decline to remand as the error in sentencing defendant under the prior version of the statute was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, as we will explain. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant and his codefendant robbed a bank. The bank tellers gave them “bait money” with tracking devices, and the two were soon apprehended by the police. Defendant waived his right to jury trial in exchange for a sentence of no more than 20 years in prison. At the court trial, defendant admitted multiple times that he was on parole when he committed the current offense. The People introduced two of defendant’s certified section 969b prison packets well as the certified California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) report into evidence. The CLETS report showed defendant’s current offense was a violation of parole and he had prior parole violations, one of the prison packets also showed parole revocations and the fact that defendant was on parole for robbery at the time of the current offense. Both certified records also showed defendant’s lengthy criminal history. After the trial, the court found defendant guilty of second degree robbery. Based on the certified records, the court found true allegations of three prior strike convictions and two prior serious felony convictions. The certified records specifically showed that defendant had been convicted of robbery multiple times from 2007 through 2013 and had been on and off parole for these convictions, most recently on parole since 2017.