P.v. Jackson CA4/3

Filed 5/13/24 P.v. Jackson CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G061646

v. (Super. Ct. No. 16NF2053)

AARON VERMONT JACKSON, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gregg L. Prickett, Judge. Affirmed as modified. Aaron J. Schechter, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Arlene A. Sevidal, Randall Einhorn and Andrew Mestman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

A jury found appellant Aaron Vermont Jackson guilty of murder and found true the special circumstance that the murder was committed during an attempted robbery. After he was sentenced to life, appellant timely noticed an appeal. On appeal, he contends his murder conviction should be reduced to second degree murder because the jury did not make a finding as to the degree of the murder. We conclude this argument is foreclosed by People v. Mendoza (2000) 23 Cal.4th 896, 908 (Mendoza), in which our high court held there is no degree of murder where the killing occurred during the commission of a burglary because all such murders are of the first degree. He also raises four sentencing challenges. We conclude he forfeited two, but showed two sentencing errors. Specifically, appellant is correct that a firearm enhancement must be stayed, and that the imposition of two assessments must be stricken because the trial court did not orally impose them. Accordingly, we correct the sentencing errors, and affirm the modified judgment. FACTS I. Procedural History In a first amended information, appellant and co-defendant Dejon Vincent Griffin were charged with the murder and attempted robbery of Maher Yousef on July 1, 2016. It was alleged as a special circumstance that the murder was committed during the attempted robbery, and that the defendants each personally used a firearm during the commission of the attempted robbery. It was further alleged that both defendants suffered a prior strike conviction under the Three Strikes law and a prior serious felony conviction. The case against appellant and Griffin was consolidated with the case against Jeffrey Tuli, who was charged with the murder of Yousef in a separately filed information. The consolidated case was tried before two juries: one jury for appellant and Griffin, and the other for Tuli. On March 24, 2022, an Orange County jury found appellant guilty of murder and found true the allegation that he was a “major participant with reckless