People v. Archuleta CA1/4

Filed 3/28/23 P. v. Archuleta CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, A165144 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Lake County Super. Ct. Nos. DAVID CLAIR ARCHULETA, CR959736A & CR959539B) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant David Clair Archuleta appeals a final judgment following his conviction by a jury for residential burglary and possession of a firearm. The trial court sentenced Archuleta to 17 years and 4 months in prison. Archuleta contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial after the prosecution elicited testimony about an out-of-court statement by his girlfriend, in violation of the court’s in limine ruling excluding all such testimony. Archuleta further contends that his sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment under the state and federal Constitutions. We find no error and affirm.

BACKGROUND A. Procedural History Archuleta was charged with residential burglary (Pen. Code, 1 § 459; counts 1, 4, 6, 7), receipt of stolen property exceeding $950 in value (§ 496, subd. (a); count 2), possession of ammunition by a prohibited person (§ 30305, subd. (a)(1); counts 3, 9, 11), vandalism causing damage in excess of $400 (§ 594, subd. (a); count 5) and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1), counts 8, 10). The information further alleged that Archuleta had previously been convicted of a serious or violent felony (§ 667, subd. (d), § 1170.12, subd. (b)) and a special allegation of a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). On March 18, 2022, the jury found Archuleta guilty of all counts other than counts 4 and 5. The trial court thereafter granted the prosecution’s motion to strike the special allegation pursuant to section 667, subdivision (a)(1). The trial court found the prior strike allegation to be true. The trial court sentenced Archuleta to 8 years and 8 months in prison, which it doubled to 17 years and 4 months based on the prior strike. (§ 1170.12, subd. (c).) Archuleta now appeals. B. Facts This case involves three residential burglaries that occurred in Clearlake Oaks within the same week.2 On December 24, 2020, David Barnett contacted the police after various items were stolen from his garage.