People v. Esquivel CA6

Filed 7/11/22 P. v. Esquivel CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H048810 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. C1808374)

v.

PERCELLA MARISSA ESQUIVEL et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

Defendants Percella Marissa Esquivel and Robert Anthony Ruiz pleaded no contest to several charges including assault with a deadly weapon and attempted robbery in connection with a fatal stabbing at a bar in San Jose. Ruiz further admitted a gang enhancement. The trial court imposed prison terms of six years eight months on Esquivel and five years four months on Ruiz. The court further ordered restitution in the approximate amount of $23,000 to reimburse the victims for funeral and burial expenses and a home security system. Defendants challenge the restitution order on the grounds that the conduct for which they were convicted did not cause the victims to incur the funeral and burial expenses. They also challenge restitution for the home security system on the ground it was statutorily unauthorized. For the reasons below, we conclude these claims are without merit.

Esquivel further contends the trial court erred by failing to calculate her custody credits. The Attorney General concedes the merit of this claim, and we accept the concession. We will reverse the judgment as to Esquivel and remand for the sole purpose of calculating custody credits. As to Ruiz, we will affirm the judgment. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Procedural Background A grand jury indicted Esquivel and Ruiz, together with four other codefendants, on the following counts: count 1—the murder of Francisco Navarro (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a))1 ; count 2—attempted robbery in the second degree (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c), 664); and counts 3, 4, and 5—assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). The grand jury further indicted Ruiz on: count 6—participating in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a)); and count 7—reckless driving while fleeing a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)). As to counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7, the indictment alleged the offenses were committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in association with a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)). Esquivel entered an agreement to plead no contest to counts 2, 3, 4, and 5 in exchange for a sentence of six years eight months in prison, and she was released from custody based on the time served. Ruiz entered an agreement to plead no contest to counts 2, 3, 6, and 7, and to admit the gang enhancement in exchange for a sentence of five years four months. At sentencing, the trial court accepted these pleas, imposed the contemplated sentences, and entered a general order of restitution as to each defendant. The family of Frank Navarro and the California Victim Compensation Board sought restitution in the amounts of $22,505 for burial and funeral expenses and $874 for upgrades to a home security system. Esquivel and Ruiz filed briefs in opposition setting forth substantially similar grounds to those raised here, and the trial court held a hearing