In re: Guiomar
Annotate this CaseGuiomar entered into a plea agreement that resulted in four convictions. The court imposed a six-year aggregate sentence: four years for robbery, a consecutive 16-month term for burglary, a consecutive eight-month term for failure to appear on a felony charge, and a concurrent two-year term for possession of a controlled substance. The electorate then passed Proposition 47, which reclassified certain felony drug and theft related offenses as misdemeanors. The court granted Guiomar’s petition for recall of sentence, Penal Code 1170.18(a), designating the convictions of burglary and possession of a controlled substance as misdemeanors. The court then imposed a six-year term for the robbery and a concurrent four-year term for the failure to appear. The court of appeal modified the sentence. When a defendant’s aggregate sentence includes multiple felony offenses, some of which are reduced to misdemeanors pursuant to Proposition 47, a court may resentence the defendant to increased terms for the remaining felony convictions, if the new aggregate sentence does not exceed the original aggregate sentence. When a defendant is convicted of failure to appear on a felony charge, but the underlying felony charge is later reduced to a misdemeanor pursuant to Proposition 47, the court is not required to vacate the failure to appear conviction. In this case, however, the trial court imposed an unauthorized second-strike sentence for defendant’s conviction of failure to appear on a felony charge.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.