People v. Rhoads CA5

DISCUSSION

Rhoads presents two related claims. He alleges the trial court “was clearly unaware of its discretion to impose a lesser enhancement” in lieu of choosing between striking the enhancement or imposing punishment under section 12022.53, subdivision (d). The People argue Rhoads forfeited this issue by failing to raise it with the trial court. Anticipating this problem, Rhoads’s opening brief also alleges ineffective assistance of counsel (IAC). Section 12022.53 provides for sentencing enhancements based on a defendant’s personal use of a firearm in the commission of certain enumerated felonies. There is a 10-year enhancement for the personal use of a firearm (id., subd. (b)); a 20-year enhancement for the personal and intentional discharge of a firearm (id., subd. (c)); and a 25-year-to-life enhancement for the personal and intentional discharge of a firearm causing great bodily injury or death (id., subd. (d)). Trial courts may, “in the interest of justice pursuant to Section 1385 …, strike or dismiss an enhancement otherwise required to be imposed by” section 12022.53. (Id., subd. (h).) In People v. Morrison (2019) 34 Cal.App.5th 217 (Morrison), Division Five of the…