People v. Pearson CA2/4

Filed 5/21/24 P. v. Pearson CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B330036 (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. PA098189)

v.

MARK PEARSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David Walgren, Judge. Affirmed. Marta I. Stanton, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Wyatt E. Bloomfield, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Stefanie Yee, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

INTRODUCTION A jury convicted defendant Mark Pearson of driving a vehicle without consent. The trial court sentenced him to the upper term, doubled under the Three Strikes law. Pearson contends the court abused its discretion by imposing the upper term and by not dismissing his prior strike conviction. He also contends the court failed to timely admonish the jury to disregard a witness’s volunteered statement. We hold Pearson’s claims are forfeited and affirm the judgment.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office filed an information charging Pearson with driving a vehicle without consent of the owner (Brett Clark) (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)). It was alleged that Pearson was convicted of the same crime on March 5, 2012 in Orange County (case No. 12WF0372) (Pen. Code, § 666.5),1 and of first degree burglary (§ 459), a serious or violent felony (§§ 667, 1170.12), on August 17, 2015 in Riverside County (case No. SWF1501387). The following aggravating factors were alleged: Pearson suffered prior convictions that were numerous or of increasing seriousness (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(2)); Pearson served a prior term in prison or county jail (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(3)); and Pearson previously performed unsatisfactorily on probation, mandatory supervision, post-release community supervision, or parole (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(b)(5)). A jury found Pearson guilty of driving a vehicle without consent. Pearson waived his right to a jury trial on the prior convictions and