P. v. Salazar CA1/4
After a jury trial, appellant Tays Eaglet Salazar (Salazar) was found guilty of second degree robbery based on the February 2016 robbery of a store clerk. Salazar does not challenge his conviction on appeal. Rather, he contends only that the trial court erred at sentencing in failing to consider numerous mitigating factors before imposing the upper term of five years for his crime. We conclude Salazar has forfeited his claim of error by failing to object on this basis in the trial court. We additionally reject Salazar’s related ineffective assistance of counsel claim and therefore affirm.
Comments on P. v. Salazar CA1/4