P. v. Ramos
Annotate this Case
Defendant challenged his conviction for shooting at an occupied motor vehicle and the related firearm and gang enhancements. He argued that the Superior Court prejudicially erred in admitting evidence related to an uncharged offense and in imposing the firearm enhancement and gang enhancements. He further challenged the validity of the gang enhancement, firearm enhancement, and underlying conviction pursuant to Assembly Bill 333. He also asserted that his conviction for shooting at an occupied motor vehicle must be reversed and retried in a bifurcated proceeding under newly enacted section 1109. Finally, he challenged the imposition of a restitution fine and certain court assessments.
The Fifth Appellate District found that Assembly Bill 333 applies retroactively and Defendant is entitled to reversal of his gang and firearm enhancements on that basis. However, the court affirmed Defendant’s conviction for shooting at an occupied motor vehicle. The court first held that the proffered evidence of Defendant’s documented association with two other gang members was relevant. Next, excluding evidence of these offenses, the existing record is insufficient to support the heightened evidentiary requirements set forth by amended section 186.22 following the enactment of Assembly Bill 333. Further, because the imposed section 12022.53, subdivision (a)(17) enhancement applied to Defendant only because his penalty had been elevated to a life term through the alternate penalty provision in former section 186.22, the section 12022.53 enhancement is no longer supported.
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.