P. v. Dexter
Filed 7/2/07 P. v. Dexter CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SAMUEL LEE DEXTER, Defendant and Appellant. | E042202 (Super.Ct.No. RIF124171) OPINION |
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Paul E. Zellerbach, Judge. Affirmed.
Patrick J. Hennessey, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
This is the second appeal in this case. In the first appeal we issued an unpublished opinion (People v. Dexter (Sept. 27, 2006, E039469)) affirming the judgment of conviction, but we remanded the case for resentencing. We found that the imposition of unstayed sentences as to two counts, for assault and criminal threats, ran afoul of Penal Code section 654,[1]and that the sentence for a third count, for false imprisonment, might also be in error for the same reason depending on the courts factual determination as to whether one of two possible incidents would provide the factual basis and justification for the imposition of an unstayed sentence as to that count.[2]
After remand to the trial court, it resentenced defendant on January 12, 2007. At that time, the court determined that section 654 did apply to the false imprisonment count. Both the prosecutor and the defense attorney agreed with that determination. The court stayed imposition of sentence then on all three of the counts for which we ordered the remand for resentencing (count 2, criminal threats; count 3, false imprisonment; and count 6, assault with a deadly weapon).
The court resentenced defendant to a determinate term of 14 years and an indeterminate sentence of life with the possibility of parole to run consecutively to the determinate term on the charge of torture (count 5). The determinate term was calculated as follows: one year, consecutively, for each of three prior prison terms ( 667.5, subd. (b)); a consecutive five-year term for a serious felony conviction enhancement ( 667, subd. (a)); and, a consecutive midterm of six years on count 4, dissuading a witness ( 136.1, subd. (c)(1)). The court awarded appropriate custody credits.
The jury had acquitted defendant on some charges, counts 1, 7, and 8.
The defendant has appealed, and at his request we appointed the same counsel who represented him on the first appeal. He has filed a no-issue brief under authority of Peoplev. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 setting forth a statement of facts, a statement of the case and requesting this court to undertake an independent review of the entire record.
We provided defendant with an opportunity to file a personal supplemental brief, but he has not done so.
We have now completed our independent review of the record and find no arguable issues.
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
/s/ McKinster
J.
We concur:
/s/ Ramirez
P.J.
/s/ Miller
J.
Publication courtesy of San Diego free legal advice.
Analysis and review provided by Santee Property line attorney.
[1]All further statutory references are to this code.
[2]We take judicial notice of our previous opinion, People v. Dexter, supra, E039469. The facts and procedural history are not otherwise relevant to this appeal and are therefore omitted.
