People v. Tuggle CA5

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Robert Anthony Tuggle contends on this appeal that the trial court erroneously found he was not entitled to a Franklin1 hearing in his petition for writ of habeas corpus and erred in denying his Franklin motion as successive. The People agree with defendant that the court erred when it denied his motion as successive. We conclude the trial court erred when it denied defendant’s motion for a Franklin hearing as successive. We reverse the court’s order and remand for the court to consider defendant’s motion under Penal Code2 section 1203.01 and In re Cook (2019) 7 Cal.5th 439 (Cook).

PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

In 2014, defendant accepted a plea agreement and pled no contest to assault with a semiautomatic firearm (§ 245, subd. (b); count 3), admitting he personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) and committed the crime for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(B)). All other charges and enhancements were dismissed. The trial court imposed a total term of 17 years in state prison, per the agreement, consisting of a nine-year term for the assault conviction, a three-year term for the great bodily injury enhancement, and a…