P. v. Mayzes 4/8/05 CA1/2

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2005 » P. v. Mayzes 4/8/05 CA1/2

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: A106553

Case Date: 06/15/2005

Preview:Filed 4/8/05 P. v. Mayzes CA1/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. MIGUEL EDWARD MAYZES, Defendant and Appellant. (Marin County Super. Ct. No. SC132695) A106553

Appellant pleaded guilty to inflicting corporal injury on his spouse. Although the probation department recommended probation, the trial court sentenced him to the upper term of four years in state prison. Appellant contends that, in so doing, the trial court violated Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. ___ [124 S.Ct. 2531] (Blakely), and also improperly relied on uncharged offenses and elements of the underlying offense. We agree with appellant's Blakely argument, and accordingly remand for resentencing. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On November 28, 2003, appellant's wife went to a hospital emergency room with severe bruises, swelling, and abrasions on her face and neck.1 When law enforcement personnel were called to investigate, she reported to them that she had awakened that morning in extreme pain, but did not recall how she had been injured. The victim told

Appellant and his wife separated after the incident that led to his conviction, and the record suggests that she had instituted divorce proceedings by the time appellant was sentenced. We will therefore refer to her from now on as the victim rather than as appellant's wife. Because appellant pleaded guilty, the facts are taken from the probation officer's presentence report.

1

1

the officers that her seven-year-old daughter had told her that "Daddy did that to you." The victim explained that appellant was a martial arts expert and had assaulted her many times in the past, though she had never reported it.2 The daughter told the officers that her father hit her mother frequently. She said the couple had been fighting the day her mother was injured, and that she had seen her father punch and kick her mother and call her names. The investigating officers found appellant and arrested him. He told them that he had suffered a work-related back injury, and was in constant pain. He said he had "whited out," and that when he regained consciousness, he had his hands on the victim's neck. He indicated that he had had similar experiences in the past. In later discussions with the probation officer, appellant attributed his loss of consciousness to a stress reaction from pain, and requested counseling. On December 1, 2003, appellant was charged with assault by means likely to cause great bodily injury (Pen. Code,

Download P. v. Mayzes 4/8/05 CA1/2.pdf