Court Opinion

ID: 9404653
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-23 19:03:40.847321+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:15.894119
License: Public Domain

Filed 6/23/23 P. v. Stevens CA1/1
                  NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or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 ONE

THE PEOPLE,
          Plaintiff and Respondent,
                                                                       A164746
v.
JAMONIE ALFONZOE STEVENS,                                              (Sonoma County Super. Ct. Nos.
                                                                        SCR-719284-1, SCR-738186-1)
          Defendant and Appellant.

         After defendant Jamonie Alfonzoe Stevens attacked a woman who had
rented him a bedroom through Airbnb, a jury found him guilty of a number of
crimes, including false imprisonment. He was sentenced to four years and
four months in prison, including the upper term of three years for felony false
imprisonment.
         On appeal, Stevens contends, and the Attorney General concedes, that
the trial court erred in sentencing Stevens for felony false imprisonment,
because the jury in fact found him guilty of the lesser included offense of
misdemeanor false imprisonment. We agree with the parties that the
resulting sentence was unauthorized and therefore remand for resentencing
in accordance with the jury’s verdict.

                                                               1
                                    I.
                          FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL
                               BACKGROUND
      In August 2018, Stevens spent the night in the guest bedroom of Jane
Doe, who rented the bedroom to guests through Airbnb. The following
morning, Stevens attacked Doe and then dragged her through the kitchen
and into the adjacent garage. After a brief struggle, she managed to escape
and get help from a bystander, who called 911 for her.
      The operative information charged Stevens with felony counts of
kidnapping, kidnapping to commit a sex crime, assault with intent to commit
a felony, assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, criminal
threats, residential burglary, and unlawfully taking a vehicle. He was also
charged with misdemeanor counts of battery and petty theft.1
      The jury’s verdict was mixed. To begin with, the jury convicted Stevens
of unlawfully taking a vehicle and both misdemeanors. But it was unable to
return a verdict on the criminal-threats charge, which was dismissed on the
prosecution’s motion, and it acquitted Stevens of assault with intent to
commit a felony and residential burglary. Although the jury also found him

      1 These charges were brought in case no. SCR-719284-1. The felony
counts were brought under Penal Code sections 207, subdivision (a)
(kidnapping), 209, subdivision (b)(1) (kidnapping to commit sex crime), 220,
subdivision (a)(1) (assault with intent to commit felony), 245,
subdivision (a)(4) (assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury), 422
(criminal threats), 459 (burglary), and Vehicle Code section 10851,
subdivision (a) (unlawful taking of vehicle). The misdemeanor counts were
brought under Penal Code sections 242 (battery) and 484, subdivision (a)
(petty theft). Stevens also stipulated to the existence of nine aggravating
factors alleged for sentencing purposes. In addition, while awaiting trial, he
was charged in case no. SCR-738186-1 with a felony count of drug possession
while in custody under Penal Code section 4573.8. He pled no contest to this
count after his trial on the other charges. All further statutory references are
to the Penal Code.

                                       2
not guilty of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, it found
him guilty of the lesser included offense of misdemeanor assault under
section 240. Finally, and of particular relevance to this appeal, the jury
found Stevens not guilty of both kidnapping counts, instead convicting him of
the lesser included offense of false imprisonment under section 236.
      In January 2022, the trial court sentenced Stevens to a total term of
four years and four months in prison, composed of the upper term of three
years for felony false imprisonment, consecutive eight-month terms for the
unlawful taking of a vehicle and drug possession while in custody, and
concurrent terms of six months each in jail for the assault, battery, and petty
theft. With time served, the sentence resulted in a paper commitment.
                                       II.
                                  DISCUSSION
      Stevens contends he received an unauthorized sentence, because the
returned verdict forms show that the jury found him guilty of misdemeanor
false imprisonment, not felony false imprisonment. The Attorney General
concedes the error, and we agree with the parties that the appropriate
remedy is a remand for resentencing.2
      False imprisonment, a lesser included offense of kidnapping (People v.
Delacerda (2015) 236 Cal.App.4th 282, 289), is defined as “the unlawful
violation of the personal liberty of another.” (§ 236.) The crime is punishable
as a misdemeanor or, if “effected by violence, menace, fraud, or deceit,” as a
felony. (§ 237, subd. (a); People v. Matian (1995) 35 Cal.App.4th 480, 484.)

      2  Stevens claims “there are other errors that may require correction at
the resentencing,” suggesting that some or all of his six-month concurrent
terms for assault, battery, and petty theft should have been stayed under
section 654. On remand, he may raise these claims with the trial court in the
first instance.

                                        3
Misdemeanor false imprisonment is a necessarily included offense of felony
false imprisonment. (Matian, at p. 484.) Whereas felony false imprisonment
is punishable by a term of 16 months, two years, or three years, misdemeanor
false imprisonment is punishable by a fine not exceeding $1,000 or by
imprisonment in the county jail for not more than one year. (§§ 237,
subd. (a), 1170, subd. (h)(1).)
      The record clearly shows that Stevens was convicted of misdemeanor,
not felony, false imprisonment. The jury received six verdict forms for the
kidnapping count: guilty and not guilty forms on kidnapping, guilty and not
guilty forms on the lesser included offense of false imprisonment by violence
or menace, and guilty and not guilty forms on the even lesser included offense
of simple false imprisonment. Of these, the jury filled out only two: the not
guilty form for kidnapping and the guilty form for simple false imprisonment.
It did not submit a verdict form for false imprisonment by violence or
menace.
      Thus, the trial court imposed an unauthorized sentence when it
sentenced Stevens to an upper term of three years for felony false
imprisonment when he was in fact never convicted of that crime. A sentence
is unauthorized “where it could not lawfully be imposed under any
circumstance in the particular case.” (People v. Scott (1994) 9 Cal.4th 331,
354.) Such errors are “not subject to forfeiture, and can never be harmless.”
(People v. Cabrera (2018) 21 Cal.App.5th 470, 477.) Rather, they may be
corrected at any time by a court with jurisdiction, and they require a remand
for resentencing. (People v. Buycks (2018) 5 Cal.5th 857, 893; Cabrera, at
p. 477.)
      Accordingly, we remand for resentencing in accordance with the jury’s
verdict.

                                       4
                                      III.
                                 DISPOSITION
      The judgment is reversed as to the sentence imposed for felony false
imprisonment but is otherwise affirmed. The matter is remanded for
resentencing consistent with the jury’s verdict.

                                       5
                                           _________________________
                                           Humes, P.J.

WE CONCUR:

_________________________
Banke, J.

_________________________
Bowen, J.*

      *Judge of the Superior Court of the County of Contra Costa, assigned
by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California
Constitution.

People v. Stevens A164746

                                       6