People v. Switt CA5

Filed 10/17/22 P. v. Switt 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F084292 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. DF016460A) v.

CARLOS JUAN SWITT, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT * APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. David E. Wolf, Judge. Paul Kleven, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

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

STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY This is an appeal from a final judgment and sentence following a plea of no contest. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.304(b)(4)(B).) It is authorized by Penal Code section 1237.1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE In a complaint filed on October 5, 2021, the Kern County District Attorney alleged that Switt willfully and unlawfully possessed a weapon while he was confined in a penal institution (§ 4502, subd. (a)), and that he had on June 18, 2003, been convicted of a prior felony offense, first degree burglary (§ 459), within the meaning of section 667, subdivisions (c)-(j) and section 1170.12, subdivisions (a)-(e). After the complaint was amended on November 5, 2021, to allege that Switt had manufactured or attempted to manufacture a weapon while confined in a penal institution (§ 4502, subd. (b)), Switt entered into a plea agreement pursuant to which he entered a no contest plea to the charge and admitted the strike with an indication by the court that the strike would be stricken pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero), and he would be sentenced to the low term of 16 months. There was a stipulated factual basis for the plea. At the sentencing hearing on February 28, 2022, Switt initially attempted to withdraw his plea, but after discussion, he withdrew his request and agreed to be sentenced. After granting the Romero motion, the court sentenced Switt to the agreed- upon term of 16 months and imposed a $300 restitution fine pursuant to section 1202.4, subdivision (b); an additional fine of $300 which was stayed pursuant to section 1202.45; $40 in court security fees under section 1465.8; and $30 in criminal conviction assessments pursuant to Government Code section 70373. Because Switt was already incarcerated, he was not entitled to any custody credits.