People v. Hill CA4/1

Filed 12/2/22 P. v. Hill CA4/1

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D079590

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD283169)

JIMMIE LEE HILL,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kenneth K. So, Judge. Affirmed and remanded with directions. Marta I. Stanton, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters and Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorneys General, Melissa Mandel, Seth M. Friedman and Nora S. Weyl, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent. The People charged Jimmie Lee Hill with robbery (Pen Code,1 § 211; count 1), assault by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

(§ 245, subd. (a)(4); counts 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12), and attempted robbery (§§ 211/664; counts 3, 5, 7, 9, 11). They alleged as to counts 1 and 2 that Hill personally inflicted great bodily injury. (§§ 12022.7, subd. (a), 1192.7, subd. (c)(8).) A jury convicted Hill of counts 1, 2 and 6, and found true the allegations on counts 1 and 2. They also convicted him on the lesser included offense of simple assault (§ 240) as to counts 4, 8, 10, and 12. The court sentenced Hill to nine years in prison as follows: the upper term of five years on count 1, plus three years for that count’s great bodily injury enhancement, plus one year on count 6. It stayed a four-year term on count 2 as well as the three-year enhancement on that count. (§ 654.) The court sentenced Hill to 180 days consecutive local custody on each of the misdemeanor counts 4, 8, 10, and 12. Hill contends: (1) insufficient evidence showed that he used force likely to produce great bodily injury against one of his victims, A.M.; (2) the court improperly admitted photographs of A.M. under Evidence Code section 352; and (3) this court should remand the matter for resentencing based on the changes to the law caused by Senate Bill No. 567, Assembly Bill No. 124 and Assembly Bill No. 518. We affirm the convictions, but remand for resentencing. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND One night, within the span of a few minutes, Hill attacked six women in San Diego. We set forth details regarding only the incidents relevant to this appeal. A.M. was walking with her friend, M.V., and Hill suddenly punched A.M.’s cheek with his closed fist. When M.V. intervened, Hill alternated between hitting each of them. Hill put A.M. in a headlock, and she thought