People v. Allen CA3

── People v. Allen CA3 ── Court: California Court of Appeal Date: May 08, 2026 Category: General Filed 5/8/26 P. v. Allen CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) THE PEOPLE, C102666 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 24FE008999) v. DOMENICK DUPRE ALLEN, Defendant and Appellant. A jury found defendant Domenick Dupre Allen guilty of false imprisonment and inflicting corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition. In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true an allegation that defendant had a prior conviction that qualified as a strike under the “Three Strikes” law. After denying defendant’s Romero1 motion to strike that prior conviction, the trial court sentenced him to 10 years in prison. On appeal, defendant’s sole contention is that the trial court erred in denying his Romero motion. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant and Regina D. had an on-and-off relationship for 20 years, and they lived together in Rancho Cordova. One night while Regina slept, defendant came home and told her to get up. When Regina got up, defendant grabbed her arm and pushed her 1 People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 (Romero). 1 along. They got into Regina’s car, and defendant drove them around for about an hour before stopping in downtown Sacramento. During the drive, defendant swore at Regina, told her he was going to kill her, and hit her several times in the back of the head and in the jaw. Defendant told Regina to get out of the car and, after she refused, he pushed her out. Defendant drove away, leaving Regina on the street in her pajamas and without her cell phone. She went to a nearby business and an employee called 911. As a result of defendant’s assault, Regina had a one-quarter inch long cut on the inside of her lip. She did not receive any medical treatment. After the incident and before trial, defendant called Regina several times. In the calls, defendant told Regina her actions pushed him into hitting her. Regina told defendant he wants to hit her to maintain control, which defendant denied. She told him she was unhappy in the relationship and was afraid of him. He told her she was going to get happy, there was no way out of their relationship, and she was afraid because she did “fucked up shit” that made him react. He said she had no way out of the relationship. He also told her to avoid getting served with a subpoena. They discussed other times defendant had punched her. A jury found defendant guilty of false imprisonment, the lesser included offense of kidnapping, and inflicting corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition. The jury found true two aggravating factors and an allegation that defendant had been previously convicted of corporal injury resulting in a traumatic condition within the last seven years. The trial court found true defendant had a prior strike conviction, a prior serious felony conviction, and two aggravating factors. Defendant filed a Romero motion, asking the trial court to strike the prior strike conviction pursuant to Penal Code2 section 1385. He argued that striking his 2018 strike 2 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 prior for robbery