People v. Feflie CA4/1

I.

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Richard Franklin Feflie appeals from a judgment of conviction and

sentence after a jury trial. A jury convicted Feflie of numerous counts related to stealing

and using his neighbor's ATM card.

On appeal, Feflie raises two contentions. First, Feflie argues that his trial counsel

rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to portions of the prosecutor's closing

arguments in which the prosecutor referred to the fact that Feflie never mentioned that he

believed his brother had committed the crimes until Feflie testified at trial. According to

Feflie, the prosecutor's use of Feflie's postarrest, post-Miranda1 silence to impeach

Feflie's trial testimony violated Doyle v. Ohio (1976) 426 U.S. 610 (Doyle) because

Feflie had invoked his right to remain silent after being advised of his rights.

Second, Feflie contends that there is insufficient evidence to support the trial

court's true finding on one of the one-year enhancements that the court imposed pursuant

to Penal Code section 667.5.2 Feflie contends that the sentencing enhancement that was

based on his prior conviction for possession of a controlled…