People v. Camero CA5

Filed 3/28/24 P. v. Camero 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F085562 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CF00657615) v.

FLAVIO CAMERO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Houry A. Sanderson, Judge. Scott Concklin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Eric L. Christoffersen and Robert C. Nash, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

Appellant Flavio Camero appeals from the superior court’s order denying him resentencing pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1172.75,2 finding he was ineligible for resentencing on the ground he was not serving a sentence with a section 667.5, subdivision (b) prison prior enhancement because it was stricken at his initial sentencing. Appellant does not contend the court made a substantive error in denying resentencing; rather, he contends the court erred by failing to forward an amended abstract of judgment to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) clarifying that he was not serving a sentence that includes a section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancement. While this appeal was pending, an amended abstract of judgment was filed granting the relief appellant requests on appeal. Given this event, we dismiss the appeal as moot. RELEVANT BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION In 2001, appellant was convicted of four counts of lewd and lascivious acts with a minor (§ 288, subd. (a); counts 1-4), and it was further found true appellant acted against multiple victims (§ 667.61, subds. (b) & (e)(5)) and had suffered a prison prior (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). He was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 15 years to life. The court struck “the additional punishment” under section 667.5, subdivision (b) “pursuant to Penal Code section 1385 … in the interest of justice.” On the abstract of judgment, the preprinted instructions for section 3 state: “ENCHANCEMENTS charged and found to be true FOR PRIOR CONVICTION OR PRISON TERMS (mainly in the PC 667 series). List all enhancements horizontally. Enter time imposed for each or “S” for stayed. DO NOT LIST enhancements stricken