People v. Powers CA5

Filed 2/10/23 P. v. Powers 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F084640 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 21CR-03058) v.

ANGELO WILLIAM POWERS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT * APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Merced County. Steven K. Slocum, Judge. Mi Kim, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Julie A. Hokans and Jeffrey A. White, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Peña, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and DeSantos, J.

Defendant Angelo William Powers challenges the trial court’s decision to impose a sentence rather than sending him to a drug treatment program. Following our review of the record, we conclude the court exercised its discretion appropriately and affirm the judgment. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL SUMMARY On June 17, 2021, the fire department was called to a dumpster fire near a market in Merced. An employee of the market who reviewed surveillance video of the incident identified defendant as the person seen setting the fire. After a Merced police officer reviewed the surveillance footage, he located defendant three blocks away from the market with a bag containing a yellow safety vest, a white headlamp, and several lighters. The clothing defendant was wearing and the items in the bag matched what the officer observed in the surveillance footage. Defendant was then taken into custody and eventually charged with committing arson. Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of committing arson involving the property of another (Pen. Code,1 § 451, subd. (d)). A certified record of defendant’s prior convictions was entered into evidence after the jury was dismissed. Defendant raised no objections to the accuracy of those certified records before sentencing. At the sentencing hearing, counsel for defendant noted that an alcohol and drug assessment had been ordered by the court but was not yet available. Defense counsel then stated:

“I would be asking the Court to—and not having received the report, [defendant] wants to proceed today with sentencing.