P. v. Mojarra
Filed 3/22/06 P. v. Mojarra CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JAVIER MOJARRA, Defendant and Appellant. | G035034 (Super. Ct. No. 01CF3125) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, James P. Marion, Judge. Affirmed with directions.
Patricia A. Scott, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Jeffrey J. Koch and Robert M. Foster, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
* * *
A jury convicted Javier Mojarra of attempted premeditated murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 664; all statutory references are to this code) and active gang participation (§ 186.22, subd. (a)), and found true allegations he acted for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1), (5)) and discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). The court imposed a life term for the attempted murder (§ 664), and a consecutive 25-year-to-life term for use of the firearm. Defendant seeks correction of the sentencing minute order and abstract of judgment and argues his sentence is cruel and unusual. We affirm the judgment with directions.
I
A detailed statement of facts is unnecessary to resolve defendant's claims. Suffice it to say, sometime after 12:30 p.m. on the afternoon of November 9, 2001, he fired multiple rounds from a semi-automatic handgun into a member of a rival gang as the victim walked with school friends along a Santa Ana street. The victim survived, but sustained multiple wounds. He and a female companion identified defendant as the shooter and another witness placed defendant at the scene.
Defendant denied shooting the victim and presented evidence he visited a friend around noon, walked to a store alone, and then accompanied his friend to retrieve her daughter and grandson at an elementary school between 2:10 p.m. and 3:20 p.m.
II
Defendant contends the abstract of judgment incorrectly designates a 15‑year â€
