People v. Mikkelson CA5
Filed 1/24/24 P. v. Mikkelson 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F084626 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR-21-009121) v.
SARAH MIKKELSON, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Dawna Reeves, Judge. Nancy Wechsler, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Hill, P. J., Peña, J. and Snauffer, J.
STATEMENT OF APPEALABILITY This appeal is from a final judgment of conviction after a jury trial and is authorized by Penal Code section 1237.1 STATEMENT OF THE CASE A first amended information filed on April 21, 2022, by the Stanislaus County District Attorney charged Mikkelson with unauthorized use of a vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a); count 1); receiving a stolen vehicle (§ 496d, subd. (a); count 2); and grand theft (§ 487, subd. (a); count 3). As to all three counts, it was alleged that the value of the property exceeded nine hundred and fifty dollars ($950). On May 2, 2022, a jury found Mikkelson guilty on all counts and the special allegations true. On May 31, 2022, the trial court suspended the imposition of sentence and placed Mikkelson on probation for two years. She was also ordered to serve 180 days in county jail and to pay a $300 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)); a $300 probation revocation fine, stayed (§ 1202.44); $90 in criminal conviction assessments (Gov. Code, § 70373); and $120 in court operation assessments (§ 1465.8). On July 11, 2022, Mikkelson filed a timely notice of appeal. STATEMENT OF FACTS Prosecution’s Evidence In 2018, Hertz District Manager Shelby Culp processed Mikkelson’s temporary replacement car rental. At that time, Culp had worked for Hertz for about seven months and her job was then limited to the rental process. Mikkelson rented a 2019 Toyota Corolla from December 15 to December 24, 2018, at a daily rental rate of $25.75 for a total of $310.02. Because the car was rented to replace Mikkelson’s stolen car, Mikkelson’s insurer, Geico Insurance Company, paid a portion of the rental fees.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)