P. v. Ruffin

Filed 2/19/10 P. v. Ruffin CA6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

Defendant Robert Ruffin appeals from a sentence imposed following his pleas of guilty to a variety of charges related to two separate bank robberies.

We appointed counsel to represent Ruffin in this court. Appointed counsel filed an opening brief which states the case and the facts, but raises no specific issues. We notified Ruffin of his right to submit written argument in his own behalf within 30 days. That period has elapsed, and we have received no written argument from Ruffin.

As Ruffin pleaded guilty to the charges, we derive the facts from the probation report, the testimony offered at the preliminary hearing and other documents in the record on appeal.

I. Factual and Procedural Background

On the morning of November 20, 2006, two men wearing black ski masks entered the Washington Mutual Bank on Story Road in San Jose. At least one of the suspects was carrying a handgun. The two men attempted to obtain money from the bank tellers, but were foiled by bank security measures. One suspect hit a bank teller on the head during the robbery.

The suspects then took purses from two women in the branch. One of the women became so fearful, she began experiencing chest pains and was transported to the hospital by ambulance.

The suspects were observed fleeing the bank in a small car, which was later determined to have been stolen. After driving approximately one block, they switched cars and escaped.

On the morning of November 21, 2006, San Jose police responded to a report of a bank robbery at a Citibank branch on Stevens Creek Boulevard. Two masked men had entered the bank and ordered everyone to the floor. They took money from the teller station, and took wallets and cell phones from customers. One of the robbers dragged another teller, who happened to be pregnant, across the floor from behind her desk. The suspects were seen entering a car driven by a third person. That car was abandoned and the three suspects entered a red Ford Taurus driven by a fourth suspect.

That same day, a San Jose police officer located a stolen vehicle in the parking lot of a Motel 6 which matched the description of the vehicle used in the Citibank robbery. Surveillance of the vehicle led officers to two rooms at the motel, where they apprehended four suspects, including Ruffin. Officers discovered cell phones and cash linked to both robberies in the motel rooms.

Ruffin told police that he had met the other suspects, whom he had known for awhile, in Los Angeles a few days prior to the robberies and had ridden to San Jose with them. He denied being involved with the robberies. However, when a police officer accused him of having dragged a pregnant woman from behind her desk during one of the robberies, Ruffin appeared genuinely concerned that someone was hurt, and wrote a letter of apology.

Two of the other suspects admitted their involvement and identified Ruffin as one of the two people who actually entered the banks to commit the robberies.

Ruffin and two codefendants were charged by information with a total of 24 separate offenses arising out of the November 20 and November 21, 2006 robberies. With respect to the November 20, 2006 incident, Ruffin was charged with three counts of attempted second degree robbery (Pen. Code, 664, 211, 212.5, subd. (c);[1] counts 1-3); two counts of second degree robbery ( 211, 212.5, subd. (c); counts 4-5); nine counts of felony false imprisonment ( 236, 237; counts 6-14); and one count of theft or unauthorized use of a vehicle (Veh. Code, 10851, subd. (a); count 15). In connection with the November 21, 2006 incident, Ruffin was charged with four counts of second degree robbery ( 211, 212.5, subd. (c); counts 16, 18-20); one count of attempted second degree robbery ( 664, 211, 212.5, subd. (c); count 17); two counts of felony false imprisonment ( 236, 237; counts 21-22), one count of assault by force likely to produce great bodily injury ( 245, subd. (a)(1); count 23); and one count of theft or unauthorized use of a vehicle (Veh. Code, 10851, subd. (a); count 24).

In addition, the information alleged that Ruffin had three prior strike convictions ( 667, subds. (b)(i), 1170.12) for robbery, conspiracy to commit bank robbery and armed bank robbery, as well as two serious felony priors ( 667, subd. (a)) and one prison prior ( 667.5, subd. (b)).

On July 6, 2007, Ruffins section 995 motion to reduce the felony false imprisonment charges (counts 6-14) to misdemeanors based on lack of proof was denied.

One of Ruffins codefendants, Bobby Lott, pleaded guilty without conditions in September 2008 and was listed as a witness in the prosecutions trial brief.

After numerous continuances, the case was called for jury trial on January 8, 2009. Following two days of in limine proceedings, Ruffin accepted a plea bargain agreement on January 13, 2009. In exchange for a top-bottom sentence of 35 years to life, Ruffin pleaded guilty to counts 1 through 14 and admitted the strike, serious felony and prison prior allegations.[2] Ruffin also agreed that he would admit personally aiding and abetting the charged crimes in counts 15 through 24, with a Harvey[3] waiver as to those counts, and those counts would be dismissed. In addition, Ruffin agreed to forego filing a Romero[4] motion and agreed to give up any right to appeal the agreed-upon sentence imposed.

On March 27, 2009, Ruffin was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement to a term of 25 years to life on count 4, with two five-year enhancements for the serious felony priors, for a total term of 35 years to life. Concurrent 25 years to life sentences were imposed on counts 1 through 3 and 5 through 14, while counts 15 through 24 were dismissed. The court awarded Ruffin a total of 986 days of presentence credits, consisting of 858 days of actual custody and 128 days of conduct credits as limited by section 2933.1. A restitution fine of $10,000 was imposed ( 1202.4, subd. (b)), and a parole revocation fine in the same amount was imposed and suspended ( 1202.45). In addition, the court imposed a court security fee of $280 ( 1465.8), a criminal justice administrative fee of $129.75, and a criminal conviction assessment totaling $420. Finally, the court ordered victim restitution in specified amounts.

At a postsentencing hearing on April 24, 2009, the court modified the victim restitution orders, directing Ruffin to pay the following amounts: $5,000 to Mary Williams; $4,312.34 to Citibank; $1,212.64 to Lourdes Rumohr; and $280 to Alberto Ortiz.

Pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, we have reviewed the whole record and have concluded there is no arguable issue on appeal.

II. Disposition

The judgment is affirmed.

Premo, J.

WE CONCUR:

Rushing, P.J.

Elia, J.

Publication courtesy of California free legal advice.

Analysis and review provided by Carlsbad Property line attorney.

San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com

[1] All further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

[2] A controversy arose at the change of plea hearing as to the validity of Ruffins prison prior, which was based on a federal bank robbery commitment in which Ruffin apparently served only one day in prison. In order to avoid unnecessary litigation of the issue, the prosecutors motion to dismiss the allegation was granted by the trial court at Ruffins sentencing hearing.

[3]People v. Harvey (1979) 25 Cal.3d 754.

[4]People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497.