People v. Velazquez-Escorza CA1/4

Filed 10/31/23 P. v. Velazquez-Escorza 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, Plaintiff and Respondent, A167253 v. (San Mateo County RUBEN VELAZQUEZ-ESCORZA, Super. Ct. No. 21-SF-002300-A) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Ruben Velazquez-Escorza appeals after the trial court sentenced him to 14 years in prison pursuant to a negotiated disposition. Velazquez-Escorza’s appointed appellate counsel filed a brief asking this court to conduct an independent review of the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Counsel advised Velazquez-Escorza of his right to file a supplemental brief; Velazquez-Escorza did not file one. We find no arguable issues that would require briefing. We will direct that the abstract of judgment be corrected in certain respects, and we will affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND An amended information charged Velazquez-Escorza with oral copulation or sexual penetration with a child who is 10 years of age or

1

younger (Pen. Code,1 § 288.7, subd. (b); count 1), committing a lewd act upon a child under 14 years of age (§ 288, subd. (a); counts 2, 3, and 4), and continuous sexual abuse of a child (§ 288.5, subd. (a); count 5). In November 2022, Velazquez-Escorza entered a plea of no contest to the charges in counts 4 and 5, in exchange for a 14-year sentence and dismissal of the remaining charges. The court found a factual basis for the plea, based on the prosecutor’s description of statements the confidential victim made to the police about acts by her former stepfather, Velazquez- Escorza.2 The court dismissed counts 1, 2, and 3. In December 2022, the court sentenced Velazquez-Escorza to a term of 14 years in prison, consisting of the 12-year middle term on count 5 (§ 288.5, subd. (a)), plus a consecutive term of two years (one-third the middle term) on count 4 (§ 288, subd. (a)). The court noted it was imposing the 14-year term “pursuant to the disposition that was contemplated at the time of the entry of plea.” The court imposed a $300 restitution fine, the minimum statutory amount (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)).3 Also, for each of the two counts of conviction, the court imposed a $40 court operations assessment (§ 1465.8) and a $30 court facilities assessment (Gov. Code, § 70373). After the court orally announced the fines and assessments, defense counsel asked the court to waive them under People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (Dueñas). Counsel stated that Velazquez-Escorza “has