People v. Macias CA5

FACTS

The prosecutor, in stating the factual basis for appellant’s plea, stated that on August 30, 2009, “[appellant] drove his friend’s [car] after having stolen it with intent to deprive the owner of title to and possession of said vehicle ….”

DISCUSSION

In his letter to this court, appellant asks this court to strike his strike conviction under Penal Code section 1385. However, appellant did not make such a request, commonly called a Romero motion, in the trial court. (People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497, 530.) Therefore, he may not do so on appeal. (People v. Carmony (2004) 33 Cal.4th 367, 375–376 [a defendant’s failure to request that the trial court exercise its discretion to dismiss or strike a conviction under Romero “waives or forfeits his ... right to raise the issue on appeal”].) Appellant also asserts in his letter, as best we can determine, that the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR) has incorrectly computed his post-sentence conduct credits. Appellant apparently bases this contention on the provisions of the three strikes law that limit to 20 percent the conduct credits a defendant sentenced under the three strikes law may earn…