P. v. Hurtarte CA4/3
A jury convicted Ramiro Hurtarte of driving under the influence of alcohol (DUI; Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)), and driving with a blood-alcohol content (BAC) of 0.08 percent or higher (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b)). Hurtarte admitted he previously suffered a felony DUI conviction within 10 years of the current offenses (Veh. Code, § 23550.5, subd.(a)). Hurtarte contends the trial court erred by excluding the preliminary hearing testimony of Robert Espalin, who testified at the prior hearing that he, not Hurtarte, drove the vehicle on the night of the incident. Hurtarte asserts the court erred in determining the defense failed to exercise reasonable diligence in securing Espalin’s attendance at trial. Alternatively, he contends his trial attorney rendered ineffective assistance by failing to diligently pursue Espalin’s attendance at trial. We do not find these contentions persuasive. Consequently, we modify the judgment to correct a sentencing error, but otherwise affirm
Comments on P. v. Hurtarte CA4/3