People v. Gama CA3

── People v. Gama CA3 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: April 17, 2026 Category: General Filed 4/17/26 P. v. Gama CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Lassen) ---- THE PEOPLE, C102820 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 2022CR0088831) v. JOSEPH MICHAEL ROGELIO GAMA, Defendant and Appellant. The trial court sentenced defendant Joseph Michael Rogelio Gama to an aggregate term of 30 years to life after a jury found him guilty of second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a))1 and custodial possession of a weapon (§ 4502, subd. (a)). Defendant appeals his sentence, contending the trial court abused its discretion because it failed to consider the relevant factors in denying his motion to strike his prior strike conviction. 1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 1 He also contends the trial court’s denial of his motion violated his right to due process under the federal Constitution. We reject defendant’s contentions and affirm the judgment. I. BACKGROUND In 2016, in a different case, defendant was convicted by plea of one count of assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a) (2)). The trial court found true two enhancement allegations: (1) defendant inflicted great bodily injury during the offense (§ 12022.7), and (2) the offense was committed for the benefit of a gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)). The court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 15 years in state prison. (§ 1170, subd. (h)(3)). In August 2020, while serving his 15-year sentence, defendant and another inmate attacked fellow inmate Juan Boyzo, who had been sitting in the prison dayroom reading. Before the custodial officers could effectively intervene, they stabbed Boyzo 65 times. Boyzo died of his injuries. Prison surveillance cameras captured the attack. The People charged defendant with willful and premeditated murder (§ 187, subd. (a)—count I) and custodial possession of a weapon (§ 4502, subd. (a)—count II). The People also alleged that defendant suffered a prior strike conviction for assault with a firearm (§§ 245, subd. (a), 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1192.7, subd. (c)). The People included a further allegation for first degree murder. During jury deliberations, without defense objection, the People withdrew the allegation of first degree murder, and the trial court instructed the jury to deliberate only on counts I and II. The jury found defendant guilty on those counts. After the jury returned its verdict, the trial court found true beyond a reasonable doubt the allegation that defendant suffered a prior strike. In 2024, prior to sentencing, defendant filed a motion under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero), asking the trial court to strike his prior strike conviction. Defendant argued that he was only 15 years old when he committed 2 the strike offense, and the age of the strike offense (almost 10 years) placed him outside the spirit of the Three Strikes Law. Defense counsel also read into the record a letter from defendant apologizing to the victim’s family.