legal news


Register | Forgot Password

P. v. Ramirez CA6

mk's Membership Status

Registration Date: May 18, 2017
Usergroup: Administrator
Listings Submitted: 0 listings
Total Comments: 0 (0 per day)
Last seen: 05:23:2018 - 13:04:09

Biographical Information

Contact Information

Submission History

Most recent listings:
P. v. Mendieta CA4/1
Asselin-Normand v. America Best Value Inn CA3
In re C.B. CA3
P. v. Bamford CA3
P. v. Jones CA3

Find all listings submitted by mk
P. v. Ramirez CA6
By
01:07:2019

Filed 12/20/18 P. v. Ramirez CA6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

EDUARDO RAMIREZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

H045782

(Santa Clara County

Super. Ct. No. F1764759)

Defendant Eduardo Ramirez pleaded no contest to four counts of attempted murder and admitted that he personally inflicted great bodily injury on one of the victims. In accordance with defendant’s plea agreement, the trial court imposed a 19-year prison term.

On appeal, defendant’s counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues are raised and asked this court to independently review the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We sent a letter to defendant notifying him of his right to submit a written argument on his own behalf on appeal. He has not done so.

Finding no arguable appellate issue, we affirm. We will provide “a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed,” as required by People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110. We will further include information about aspects of the trial court proceedings that might become relevant in future proceedings. (Ibid.)

I. Factual and Procedural Background[1]

Officers with the Morgan Hill Police Department responded to a reported family disturbance at an apartment on May 20, 2017. They observed defendant stabbing himself in the neck in front of the apartment building. The officers took defendant into custody. He received emergency medical attention at the scene and was taken to the hospital.

Defendant’s common-law wife, L., and their three children—12-year-old S., 11‑year-old E., and one-year-old G.—were inside the family apartment. All four had suffered stab wounds, which S. and L. told police had been inflicted by defendant. L. had a six-inch laceration on the side of her neck; S. had a six-inch laceration on her neck and a three-inch laceration below her left temple; E. had puncture wounds to the side of his chest and the back of his head and lacerations on his neck; G. had a puncture wound to her rib cage and a three-inch laceration on her chest. G. had to be admitted to the pediatric ICU overnight. L. told police that defendant had been acting strangely in recent weeks, behavior she attributed to his drug use.

On May 24, 2017, defendant was charged by felony complaint with four counts of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 664, subd. (a),[2] 187; counts 1-4) and three counts of inflicting pain or suffering on a child (§ 273a, subd. (a); counts 5-7). The complaint alleged that the attempted murders were willful, deliberate and premeditated. Defendant and the prosecutor reached a negotiated plea agreement, under which the premeditation allegations would be stricken and the complaint would be amended to add an allegation that defendant inflicted great bodily injury on G. (§ 12022.7). Defendant agreed to plead no contest to the four counts of attempted murder and to admit the great bodily injury allegation in exchange for the dismissal of the other three counts and a 19-year prison sentence. On February 1, 2018, defendant pleaded no contest to counts 1, 2, 3, and 4 and admitted that he personally inflicted great bodily injury on G.

The court sentenced defendant on April 20, 2018. As called for by the plea agreement, the court imposed a 19-year prison sentence: the upper term of 9 years on count 4, plus a consecutive three years for the section 12022.7 enhancement, plus a consecutive two years four months (one-third the middle term of seven years) on count 1, plus a consecutive two years four months (one-third the middle term of seven years) on count 2, plus a consecutive two years four months (one-third the middle term of seven years) on count 3. The court dismissed the remaining counts and ordered the premeditation allegations stricken. The court ordered defendant to pay $2,592 in restitution to California Victim Compensation Board and imposed the following fines and fees: a $10,000 restitution fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)(1)) with an additional $10,000 parole revocation fine, which was suspended pending successful completion of parole (§ 1202.45); a $160 court operations assessment fee (§ 1465.8); a $120 criminal conviction assessment fee (Gov. Code, § 70373); and a $129.75 criminal justice administration fee payable to the City of Morgan Hill (Gov. Code, §§ 29550 et seq.).

Defendant timely filed a notice of appeal on April 24, 2018.

II. Discussion

Having examined the entire record, we conclude that no arguable issues on appeal exist.

III. Disposition

The judgment is affirmed.

_________________________________

ELIA, ACTING P. J.

WE CONCUR:

_______________________________

BAMATTRE-MANOUKIAN, J.

_______________________________

MIHARA, J.

People v. Ramirez

H045782


[1] The facts are taken from the probation officer’s report.

[2] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.





Description Defendant Eduardo Ramirez pleaded no contest to four counts of attempted murder and admitted that he personally inflicted great bodily injury on one of the victims. In accordance with defendant’s plea agreement, the trial court imposed a 19-year prison term.
On appeal, defendant’s counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues are raised and asked this court to independently review the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We sent a letter to defendant notifying him of his right to submit a written argument on his own behalf on appeal. He has not done so.
Finding no arguable appellate issue, we affirm. We will provide “a brief description of the facts and procedural history of the case, the crimes of which the defendant was convicted, and the punishment imposed,” as required by People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110. We will further include information about aspects of the trial court proceedings that might become relevant in future proceedings. (I
Rating
0/5 based on 0 votes.
Views 9 views. Averaging 9 views per day.

    Home | About Us | Privacy | Subscribe
    © 2025 Fearnotlaw.com The california lawyer directory

  Copyright © 2025 Result Oriented Marketing, Inc.

attorney
scale