People v. Vessels CA3

Filed 12/14/22 P. v. Vessels CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Glenn) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C094275

v. (Super. Ct. No. 20CR15632)

JAMES RANDALL VESSELS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant James Randall Vessels asked this court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) We asked the parties to provide supplemental briefing on the following: (1) whether defendant is entitled to relief under recent changes in sentencing law, such as Senate Bill No. 567 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 731, § 1.3) (Senate Bill 567), and, if so, the appropriate remedy given that he entered

1

into an open plea agreement in 2019; and (2) whether this court should address the absence of Penal Code section 1202.451 revocation fines in 2019 and 2021. Having reviewed the supplemental briefing and the record as required by Wende, we will remand the matter for resentencing to allow the trial court to exercise its new sentencing discretion based on applicable changes in the law, including Senate Bill No. 81 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 721, § 1) (Senate Bill 81). Section 1202.45 revocation fines can be addressed at resentencing. Finding no other arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we will otherwise affirm the judgment. I In 2019, defendant pleaded guilty to multiple charges as part of an open plea. The trial court sentenced defendant to county jail for an aggregate term of eight years as follows: in case No. 18NCR12790 (2790), the upper term of three years for identity theft (§§ 530.5, subd. (c)(3)) plus two years consecutive for an on-bail enhancement (§ 12022.1); in case No. 18NCR13501 (3501), eight months consecutive for possessing drugs in jail (§ 4573.8); in case No. 18NCR13351 (3351), eight months consecutive for vandalism (§ 594, subd. (a)); in case No. 18NCR12665 (2665), eight months consecutive for failing to appear after release (§ 1320, subd. (b)); and in case No. 17NCR11885 (1885), one year consecutive for transporting a controlled substance for sale (Health & Saf. Code, § 11379, subd. (a)). The trial court did not explain why it imposed the upper term in case No. 2790. Pursuant to section 1170, subdivision (h), the trial court ordered a split sentence, with the last four years of the sentence suspended and defendant placed on mandatory supervision. The trial court awarded the following presentence credit: