Filed 7/15/26 P. v. Sermeno CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Butte)
THE PEOPLE, C103450
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. 24CF04525)
v.
ANTHONY LEE ALTAMIRANO SERMENO,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appointed counsel for defendant Anthony Lee Atamirano Sermeno has asked this
court to review the record and determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal.
(People v. Wende (1975) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Finding no arguable error that would result in a
disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment.
FACTS AND HISTORY OF THE PROCEEDINGS
In August 2021, K.M. engaged in the act of oral copulation with defendant
multiple times. In December 2021, E.L. engaged in the act of oral copulation with
defendant multiple times.
In November 2024, defendant was charged with two counts of participating in an
act of oral copulation with K.M (Pen. Code, § 287, subd. (b)(1); counts 1 and 2, statutory
section citations that follow are to the Penal Code) and two counts of oral copulation with
E.L. (§ 287, subd. (b)(1); counts 3 and 4). Defendant was also charged with furnishing
1
cannabis to a minor over 14 years old (Health & Saf. Code, § 11361, subd. (b); count 5)
and resisting a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1); count 6).
On January 2, 2025, defendant pleaded no contest to counts 1 and 3. On the
People’s motion, the trial court dismissed the remaining charges with a Harvey waiver.
(People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.)
On January 2, 2025, defendant submitted a pro. per. peremptory challenge to the
trial judge under Code Civil Procedure section 170.6, which the court struck as untimely
on January 9, 2025.
On January 10, 2025, defendant filed a pro. per. motion to withdraw the plea
claiming evidence established his innocence and defense counsel was ineffective. At a
hearing on January 30, 2025, defendant told the trial court he did not want to withdraw
his plea and he was satisfied with his attorney.
On February 4, 2025, the trial court ordered a psychological or psychiatric
evaluation under section 1203.067 to determine whether defendant would pose a threat to
the victim if placed on probation. (§ 1203.067, subd. (a) [probation procedures for sex
offenders, including appointment of psychiatrist or psychologist under section 288.1 to
consider threat to victim and defendant’s potential for positive response to treatment];
§ 288.1 [psychiatrist’s report regarding defendant’s condition required to grant probation
to defendant convicted of child molestation].) The court appointed a doctor to conduct a
mental examination to determine if defendant would benefit from sex offender therapy.
The court required the report to be delivered to the court and the parties by March 6,
2025.
At the sentencing hearing on March 6, 2025, the trial court stated it had read and
considered the probation report, the section 288.1 report filed on March 5, 2025, and
numerous written communications from defendant and others. The court also reviewed
certified records of defendant’s prior convictions and the plea form reflecting a Harvey
waiver and stipulations and waivers regarding aggravating and mitigating factors.
2
The trial court stated defendant was eligible for probation only in an unusual case
under section 1203, subdivision (e)(4). The court reviewed the unusual case criteria
under California Rules of Court, rule 4.413 (all further rule references are to California
Rules of Court). Finding that none applied, the court denied defendant probation.
The court reviewed section 1170, subdivision (b)(6) factors and found defendant
had experienced psychological, physical or childhood trauma, including but not limited to
abuse, neglect, exploitation, or sexual violence, which was a contributing factor in the
commission of the offenses. The court accordingly considered imposition of the low
term but found it would not be in the interest of justice because aggravating factors
outweighed mitigating factors. In mitigation, the court considered the trauma defendant
experienced (rule 4.423(b)(3)). In aggravation, the court found defendant’s prior
convictions as an adult were numerous or of increasing seriousness (rule 4.421(b)(2)),
defendant served a prior prison term (rule 4.421(b)(3)), he was on mandatory supervision
when the crime was committed (rule 4.421(b)(4)), and his performance on probation and
post-release community supervision was unsatisfactory (rule 4.421(b)(5)).
The trial court imposed the upper term of three years on count 1 and one-third the
middle term on count 3 consecutive, for a total state prison sentence of three years eight
months. The court stated it chose the upper term “in light of the two separate victims,
multiple incidents, and long criminal history.” The court imposed mandatory minimum
fines and fees, plus a fine of $300 under section 290.3 with penalties, surcharges, and
assessments totaling $1,170 for each count. The court credited defendant with 127 actual
days and 126 conduct days for a total of 253 days of precustody credit.
Defendant filed a timely notice of appeal. The trial court granted defendant’s
request for a certificate of probable cause.
3
DISCUSSION
Defendant’s appointed counsel has asked this court to conduct an independent
review of the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal.
(People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of his right
to file a supplemental brief within 30 days from the date the opening brief was filed. We
have not received any communication from defendant. We have undertaken an
examination of the record and conclude there is no arguable error that would result in a
disposition more favorable to him.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
/s/
HULL, J.
We concur:
/s/
EARL, P. J.
/s/
RENNER, J.
4