People v. Ogletree CA2/5

Filed 6/16/23 P. v. Ogletree CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B322650

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. YA093658-01)

FLETCHER LOUIS OGLETREE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of the County of Los Angeles, Alan B. Honeycutt, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Steven S. Lubliner, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill and Steven E. Mercer, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I. BACKGROUND

On January 19, 2017, defendant Fletcher Ogletree pleaded guilty to: four counts of attempted second-degree robbery (Pen. Code,1 §§ 664 and 212.5, subd. (c)); one count of second-degree robbery (§ 212.5, subd. (c)); and one count of felony evasion of a peace officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2). He also admitted to suffering a prior strike conviction within the meaning of section 667, subdivisions (b) through (i) and section 1170.12 and two prior serious felony convictions within the meaning of section 667, subdivision (a)(1). The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 26 years and eight months, which included two consecutive five-year sentence enhancements under section 667, subdivision (a)(1). In a letter dated May 9, 2022, the Secretary of the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (Secretary) recommended that the trial court recall defendant’s sentence pursuant to former section 1170.03, subdivision (a)(1).2 The Secretary explained: “In light of the court’s newfound authority to not impose a consecutive enhancement pursuant to . . . [s]ection 667, [s]ubdivision (a)(1) (authority which did not exist at the time of [defendant’s] sentencing), and after personally reviewing [defendant’s prison] commitment offense and in-prison