People v. Tellez CA4/3

DISCUSSION

I. Senate Bill No. 567

At the time Tellez was sentenced, the trial court had broad discretion under section 1170, subdivision (b), to decide which of the tripartite terms of imprisonment to impose for an offense or enhancement. (See § 1170, subd. (b), as amended by Stats. 2020, ch. 29, § 14; People v. Sandoval (2007) 41 Cal.4th 825, 843, 846-847 (Sandoval).) Exercising its discretion, the trial court imposed upper terms on Tellez’s conviction for assault with intent to commit a sexual offense (six years) and the deadly weapon enhancement attached to this count (10 years), based on its finding the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances. The court found three aggravating circumstances related to the crime: (1) “The crime involved great violence, disclosing a high degree of cruelty, viciousness or callousness in that [Tellez] struck the victim on the head with a metal flashlight and stabbed her in the abdomen with a knife”

2 Due to the issues presented on appeal, a truncated version of the facts suffices.

3 (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.421(a)(1)); (2) Tellez “was armed with and did use a weapon, a knife, at the time of the commission of this…