P. v. Bejarano
Filed 10/5/10 P. v. Bejarano CA2/5
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 This opinion has not been certified for
publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115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
SECOND
APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION
FIVE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
TONY BEJARANO,
Defendant and Appellant.
B219306
(Los Angeles
County Super.
Ct.
No. NA079535)
APPEAL from
a judgment of the Superior Court
of Los Angeles
County, Joan Comparet-Cassani, Judge. Affirmed.
Cheryl
Barnes Johnson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Edmund G.
Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle
and Stephanie A. Miyoshi, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and
Respondent.
_________________________________
The jury found defendant Tony Bejarano guilty of evading an officer (Veh. Code,
§ 2800.2, subd. (a)), resisting an
executive officer (Pen. Code, § 69), driving under the influence of alcohol
(Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)), and driving with a blood alcohol level of .08
percent or higher (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b)). In a separate proceeding, the trial court
found true the recidivist allegations, including two prior prison terms (Pen.
Code, § 667.5, subd. (b))
and one prior serious felony conviction under the three strikes law (Pen. Code,
§§ 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d), 667, subds. (b)–(i)). The court imposed a prison term of nine years
ten months. Subsequently, defendant's
strike prior conviction was ruled unconstitutional and set aside. Defendant was resentenced to a term of six
years two months.[1]
In this
timely appeal, defendant contends substantial
evidence does not support the conviction of evading an officer, it was an
abuse of discretion to deny defendant's request to substitute new private
counsel, and the trial court erred in sentencing him to the full consecutive
term for misdemeanor driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 percent or more. We affirm the judgment.
STATEMENT OF FACTS
Prosecution Case
Late in the evening of September 1, 2008, defendant was driving northbound on
Alamitos at a high, accelerating rate of speed when he suddenly drove into the
southbound lane and nearly collided with two Long Beach
police officers who were on patrol in an unmarked patrol vehicle. The officers made a U-turn and followed
defendant. Defendant did not stop for a
red light. The officers activated their
lights and siren in an attempt to conduct a traffic stop. Defendant did not stop. Defendant accelerated at a high rate of speed
with the police officers in pursuit.
Defendant failed to stop at two stop signs. Traveling at 80 miles an hour in a 25-mile
per hour zone, defendant failed to stop at a third stop sign. Driving at 50 to 60 miles an hour without
stopping at a fourth stop sign, defendant lost control of his vehicle and hit a
concrete pole and two signs. The
officers ordered defendant to get out of his car. Defendant backed his car into the patrol car,
nearly hitting the officers, and drove away.
The officers resumed pursuit with their lights and sirens on, but
defendant did not pull over. Defendant
traveled in oncoming lanes. Defendant
turned off his vehicle lights in an attempt to evade detection and failed to
stop at another red light. Defendant
drove into a parking lot and attempted to flee on foot. Defendant disregarded the officers' orders to
stop and tried to fight them off before he surrendered and was taken into
custody. The amount of ethanol found in
defendant's blood was .128 percent.
Defense Case
A resident
of the neighborhood where defendant was apprehended testified the police used
excessive force to subdue defendant.
DISCUSSION
Evading an Officer
Defendant
contends the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction of evading an
officer in violation of Vehicle Code, section 2800.2, subdivision (a), because
there was no evidence the pursuing officers' vehicle was â€
| Description | The jury found defendant Tony Bejarano guilty of evading an officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)), resisting an executive officer (Pen. Code, § 69), driving under the influence of alcohol (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)), and driving with a blood alcohol level of .08 percent or higher (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (b)). In a separate proceeding, the trial court found true the recidivist allegations, including two prior prison terms (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)) and one prior serious felony conviction under the three strikes law (Pen. Code, §§ 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d), 667, subds. (b)–(i)). The court imposed a prison term of nine years ten months. Subsequently, defendant's strike prior conviction was ruled unconstitutional and set aside. Defendant was resentenced to a term of six years two months. |
| Rating |
