People v. Bondarenko CA5

Filed 12/27/23 P. v. Bondarenko 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F085837 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. BF184830A) v.

IRINA OLEGOVNA BONDARENKO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Brian M. McNamara, Judge. Aurora Elizabeth Bewicke, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez, Amanda D. Cary and Ian Whitney, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Smith, Acting P. J., Snauffer, J. and DeSantos, J.

Defendant Irina Olegovna Bondarenko contends on appeal that her sentence must be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing because the trial court erred when it (1) failed to properly apply newly amended Penal Code1 section 1170, subdivision (b)(6)(B);2 and (2) did not impose sentences for her misdemeanor convictions (counts 2, 8, 14 & 15). The People argue that the court properly applied section 1170, subdivision (b)(6)(B) but agree that the court erred by failing to impose sentences on defendant’s misdemeanor convictions. However, the People contend defendant’s case must be remanded only for limited resentencing on the misdemeanor convictions. We agree with the parties that the trial court erred by failing to impose sentences on defendant’s misdemeanor convictions at the resentencing hearing. We vacate defendant’s sentence and remand for a full resentencing. In all other respects, we affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY This is the second appeal in defendant’s case.3 In 2021, a jury found defendant guilty of burglary (§ 460, subd. (a); count 1); misdemeanor petty theft (§ 484; count 2);4 being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1); count 7); misdemeanor possession of heroin (Health & Saf. Code, §11350, subd. (a); count 8); possession of metal knuckles (§ 21810; count 11);

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted. 2 Section 1170, subdivision (b)(6)(B) was amended effective January 1, 2022, by Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.). 3 We take judicial notice of the appellate records, briefs, and nonpublished opinion in People v. Bondarenko (Sept. 20, 2022, F083651). (Evid. Code, §§ 452, subd. (d), 459, subd. (a); Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.147.) 4 Count 2 was charged in the information as petty theft with a prior theft offense (§ 666, subd. (a)) but was amended to misdemeanor petty theft (§ 484) after trial on stipulation of the parties.