Court Opinion

ID: 9868935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-26 19:05:49.366016+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:23:13.492288
License: Public Domain

Filed 9/26/23 P. v. Harper CA1/2
                  NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or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

                                      FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

                                                   DIVISION TWO

 THE PEOPLE,
           Plaintiff and Respondent,
                                                                        A167371
 v.
 DERRICK DAMON HARPER                                                   (Contra Costa County
                                                                         Super. Ct. No. 5-161769-5)
           Defendant and Appellant.

         Defendant Derrick Harper’s court-appointed counsel has filed a brief
asking this court for an independent review of the record under People v.
Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. Defendant was informed of his right to file
supplemental briefing and has not filed such a brief. We have reviewed
counsel’s brief and independently reviewed the record, and we find no errors
or other issues requiring further briefing. Accordingly, we affirm.
                                                  BACKGROUND
Prior Proceedings – Underlying Convictions, Appeal, and Remand
         Following a jury trial, defendant was convicted of first degree felony
murder (Pen. Code,1 §§ 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(17)) with gang
(§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)) and firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)) enhancements.
Defendant was also found to have suffered two prior felony convictions for

         1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

                                                               1
kidnapping (§ 207, subd. (a)), which qualified as strikes (§§ 667, subds. (d)-(e),
1170.12, subds. (b)-(c)) and serious felonies (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)) and for which
he served two prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (a)).
      The trial court imposed “a life sentence without parole for the murder
with special circumstances (§§ 187; 190.2); a consecutive term of 75 years to
life (25 years tripled under § 667, subd. (e)(2)(A)(i)); a consecutive firearm
enhancement of 25 years (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)); two five-year consecutive
prior serious felony enhancements based on defendant’s two prior kidnapping
convictions (§ 667, subd. (a) [10 years]); and two three-year consecutive prior
prison term enhancements (§ 667.5 [6 years]). [¶] In addition, the court
imposed a 45-year minimum parole eligibility (15 years tripled under § 667,
subd. (e)(2)(A)(i) on the street gang enhancement.” (People v. Harper (May 4,
2022, A153332) 2022 WL 1401292, at *27 (Harper).)
      In a prior appeal, we reversed the true finding on the gang
enhancement allegation (§ 186.22, subd. (b)) and remanded for retrial if the
People so elected.
      We also found sentencing error and remanded for resentencing. We
directed the trial court to strike “1) the 75-year-to-life term (25-year base
tripled) imposed under section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(A)(i); 2) one five-year
prior serious felony enhancement imposed under section 667, subdivision (a);
3) both of the three-year prior prison term enhancements imposed under
section 667.5, subdivision (a); and 4) the 45-year minimum parole eligibility
term imposed under section 186.22, subdivision (b)(5)” and further directed
the court “to determine whether to exercise its discretion under section
12022.53, subdivision (h) to strike the firearm enhancement.” (Harper,
supra, 2022 WL 1401292, at *31.)

                                        2
Current Proceedings – Resentencing Following Remand
      On remand, the People elected not to retry the gang enhancement.
      A resentencing hearing was held on February 24, 2023. Defense
counsel was present, and defendant appeared via Zoom. Defense counsel was
given an opportunity to argue, and defendant was given an opportunity to
speak.
      The trial court recognized it had discretion to dismiss the firearm
enhancement and found it was not in the interest of justice to do so. The
court cited the facts that defendant was the sole shooter who killed the victim
in what appeared to be a planned murder and robbery and that defendant
had an extensive and violent criminal history.
      The trial court sentenced defendant to life without the possibility of
parole for first degree murder, plus enhancements of 25 years to life for the
firearm enhancement under section 12022.53, subdivision (d), and five years
for the prior serious felony conviction under section 667, subdivision (a).
      In compliance with this court’s disposition in defendant’s prior appeal,
the court struck the remaining enhancements, the 75-year-to-life term, and
the 45-year minimum parole eligibility term.
      On February 27, 2023, defendant filed a notice of appeal from the order
of February 24, 2023.
                                DISCUSSION
      The sentence imposed appears to be authorized by law and conforms to
our directives in Harper, supra, 2022 WL 1401292, at *31. Based on our
review of the record before us, defendant was represented by competent
counsel who acted to protect his rights and interests. We find no arguable
issues within the meaning of People v. Wende, supra, 25 Cal.3d 436.

                                       3
                       DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.

                            4
                                _________________________
                                Miller, J.

WE CONCUR:

_________________________
Stewart, P.J.

_________________________
Richman, J.

A167371, People v. Harper

                            5