Filed 10/6/26 P. v. Jamerson-Keosodsay 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
(Sacramento)
THE PEOPLE, C103194
Plaintiff and Respondent,
(Super. Ct. No. 23FE017065)
v.
DARRION JAMERSON-KEOSODSAY,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appointed counsel for defendant Darrion Jamerson-Keosodsay has asked this
court to conduct an independent review of the record in case No. 23FE017065 (065) to
determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979)
25 Cal.3d 436.) Having reviewed the record as required by Wende, we find the abstract
of judgment erroneously includes fines imposed in resentencing Jamerson-Keosodsay in
a prior case under the parties’ plea agreement. We otherwise affirm the judgment.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
On October 21, 2023, Jamerson-Keosodsay unexpectedly visited his ex-girlfriend,
V.G., during a family reunion. V.G.’s uncle was drawn to a commotion in the house and
found Jamerson-Keosodsay wearing a ski mask. The uncle and his brother confronted
Jamerson-Keosodsay and ejected him from the home. Jamerson-Keosodsay then pulled
out a Glock 27 semiautomatic firearm, pointed it at the uncle, and fired one round, which
missed him.
1
Sacramento sheriff’s deputies found Jamerson-Keosodsay within a mile of the
home, hiding in a field. Jamerson-Keosodsay resisted the K-9 dog and officers who
attempted to arrest him. The Glock 27 was found near Jamerson-Keosodsay in the field.
Jamerson-Keosodsay was charged in case No. 065 with assault with a
semiautomatic firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (b)1; count one), possession of a firearm
by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1); count two), possession of a firearm within 10 years of a
misdemeanor conviction (§ 29805; count three), possession of ammunition by a felon
(§ 30305, subd. (a)(1); count four), and resisting arrest (§ 148, subd. (a)(1); count five).
For count one, it was alleged that Jamerson-Keosodsay personally used a firearm.
(§ 12022.5, subds. (a), (d).) For counts one through four, it was alleged that Jamerson-
Keosodsay committed the offenses while out on bail in case No. 23FE000894 (894).
(§ 12022.1.)
After multiple Marsden2 motions and suspensions of the proceedings under
section 1368, Jamerson-Keosodsay pled no contest to count one, admitted the attached
on-bail enhancement, and pled no contest to count three. Pursuant to the plea agreement,
the trial court sentenced Jamerson-Keosodsay to the middle term of six years on count
one, plus two years for the on-bail enhancement, and one-third the middle term of eight
months on count three, for a total term of eight years eight months in case No. 065. As
part of the agreement, the court resentenced Jamerson-Keosodsay in case No. 894 from
an original sentence of three years to one-third the middle term of eight months for
possession of a firearm within 10 years of a misdemeanor conviction (§ 29805, subd.
(a)(1); count one), in exchange for dropping his pending appeal in that case. Per the
agreement, the court also granted Jamerson-Keosodsay 482 actual days and 482 conduct
1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2 People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118.
2
days for a total of 964 days of presentence custody credit, which the court applied as time
served on three one-year sentences previously imposed in case No. 894 for three counts
of misdemeanor brandishing a firearm. (§ 417, subd. (a).) Jamerson-Keosodsay’s
aggregate sentence in case No. 065 and case No. 894 was nine years four months. The
remaining counts were dismissed.
In case No. 065, the trial court imposed the minimum mandatory $300 restitution
fine (§ 1202.4, subd. (b)) and imposed and suspended a $300 parole revocation fine
unless parole is revoked (§ 1202.45), and struck the mandatory court operations fee
(§ 1465.8) and court facility fee (Gov. Code, § 70373) after defense counsel argued
Jamerson-Keosodsay was indigent. (See People v. Kopp (2025) 19 Cal.5th 1, 30.)
Jamerson-Keosodsay appealed in February 2025, and he did not obtain a
certificate of probable cause. His opening brief was filed in May 2026, and this case was
fully briefed on June 23, 2026.
DISCUSSION
Jamerson-Keosodsay’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.) Counsel advised Jamerson-Keosodsay
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 Jamerson-Keosodsay. We
have undertaken an examination of the record and find that the abstract of judgment
included an error.
In resentencing Jamerson-Keosodsay in case No. 894, the trial court did not orally
reimpose any fines or fees. However, the trial court clerk erred in including in the
abstract of judgment a $4,800 restitution fine and a $4,800 parole revocation fine in that
case. These items must be stricken as not comporting with the oral pronouncement of
judgment. (People v. Zackery (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 380, 388-389.) We will direct the
3
superior court to delete from the abstract of judgment the fines the trial court did not
impose at Jamerson-Keosodsay’s resentencing in case No. 894.
DISPOSITION
The trial court clerk is directed to delete the $4,800 restitution fine (§ 1202.4) and
the $4,800 parole revocation fine (§ 1202.45) in case No. 23FE000894 from the abstract
of judgment and forward a corrected and certified copy to the Department of Corrections
and Rehabilitation. The judgment is otherwise affirmed.
/s/
BOULWARE EURIE, J.
We concur:
/s/
EARL, P. J.
/s/
FEINBERG, J.
4
