Opinion
F086668
08-07-2024
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. DAMON BENTLEY FRANKLIN, Defendant and Appellant.
J. Edward Jones, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. No. BF169853A, John W. Lua, Judge.
J. Edward Jones, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
THE COURT [*]
Appellate counsel for defendant Damon Bentley Franklin has filed an opening brief summarizing the pertinent facts and raising no issues but asking this court to review the record independently. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) The opening brief also includes a declaration from appellate counsel stating defendant was advised of his right to file a brief of his own with this court. By letter dated April 18, 2024, we also invited defendant to submit additional briefing. Defendant has not filed a response.
Pursuant to Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have reviewed the entire record. Following our Supreme Court's direction in Kelly, we provide a brief description of the facts and the procedural history of this case. (Kelly, at p. 110.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm.
PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
In 2018, defendant was charged by information with 12 separate counts of arson, specifically alleging he maliciously set fires to various forms of property, one of which was an inhabited building, all felonies (Pen. Code, § 451, subds. (b)-(d)). It was further alleged as to all 12 counts, that defendant had two prior convictions for serious felonies (§ 667, subd. (a) &§ 1170.12), and that he served three prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
Following a jury trial, defendant was found guilty of committing all 12 counts of arson. Just prior to sentencing, the trial court found true the various aggravating allegations addressed in the information. Defendant was then sentenced to a total term of 360 years, consisting of 10 terms of 25 years to life, with an additional 110 years related to the various enhancements imposed. Following an appeal, defendant's conviction of one count of arson was reversed, as were all 12 section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancements, and the case was remanded for resentencing. However, in all other respects, the judgment was affirmed.
Two additional terms of 25 years to life were stayed pursuant to section 654.
After the case was remanded to the trial court, but before resentencing, defendant filed a brief pursuant to section 1385 and People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, asking the court to completely revisit the sentence imposed. The brief specifically asked the trial court to remove the strike enhancements arguing there were multiple enhancements imposed in the case, the enhancements would result in a sentence exceeding 20 years, the crimes defendant committed were connected to mental illness, and the prior convictions relied upon were over five years old or were committed while defendant was young. The prosecution filed a response to defendant's brief.
During the resentencing hearing, the trial court noted that the record showed defendant was 23 and 30 years old when his prior serious felony convictions were entered.
On July 18, 2023, the trial court resentenced defendant by dismissing count 1, striking all section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancements, as required by the appellate court's opinion, and further striking all section 667, subdivision (a) enhancements, which was not specifically ordered in the appellate court's opinion. Defendant's request to strike the prior conviction was denied. Defendant ultimately received a new total sentence of 250 years to life. The sentence was made up of one count of 25 years to life, nine consecutive terms of 25 years to life each, and one term of 25 years to life stayed pursuant to section 654.
Before selecting this sentence, the trial court referenced the threat to public safety defendant's crimes posed, and cited the fact that no evidence had been produced supporting the argument defendant's crimes were connected to his mental health.
A notice appealing this new sentence was filed on August 2, 2023.
Following the filing of the notice of appeal, appellate counsel for defendant sent a letter to the trial court requesting the amended felony abstract of judgment be corrected to reflect the additional days of custody credit defendant had accrued since he was initially sentenced in 2019. On July 26, 2024, we received a corrected amended abstract of judgment reflecting defendant's additional custody credits.
FACTUAL SUMMARY
Over the course of two days in September 2017, defendant set a series of fires to several abandoned single family structures, an inhabited apartment complex, and in an alley in Kern County, California.
DISCUSSION
Having carefully reviewed the entire record, we conclude there are no arguable issues on appeal. (Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d at pp. 441-443.)
DISPOSITION
The trial court prepared a corrected amended abstract of judgment and forwarded it to all relevant parties. The judgment is affirmed.
[*]Before Pena, Acting P. J., Smith, J. and Snauffer, J.