P. v. Esquibel CA5
Enrique Esquibel appeals from a resentencing hearing at which the trial court struck the prison priors, declined to strike the firearm enhancements, and adopted all other findings and orders from the original sentencing hearing. One of those findings was that counts 1 and 5 were not committed pursuant to one intent and objective, and thus consecutive sentences were appropriate. Esquibel now contends that the trial court abused its discretion by not reconsidering its prior findings as to counts 1 and 5 in light of People v. Roles (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 935 (Roles). We agree with respondent that Roles is materially distinguishable, and the trial court properly declined to stay sentence on count 5.
Comments on P. v. Esquibel CA5