 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Kennon5/5/2003
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
An information filed in San Mateo County Superior Court charged appellant with four counts of receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)), three counts of first degree robbery (§§ 459, 460, subd. (a)) and driving under the influence of alcohol (Veh. Code, § 23152, subd. (a)), a misdemeanor. The information further alleged as both a strike (§ 1170.12) and an enhancement (§ 667, subd. (a)) that appellant suffered a prior serious felony conviction. The information also alleged that appellant served a prior prison term, a sentencing enhancement (§ 667.5, subd. (b)).
Appellant pleaded guilty to three counts of first degree burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (a)) and admitted suffering a prior serious felony conviction (§§ 1170.12, 667, subd. (a)). The court then granted the prosecution's motion to dismiss the remainder of the information.
The court sentenced appellant to the mitigated term of two years in state prison for the first count of first degree burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (a)). The court then doubled this principal term to four years because of appellant's admitted strike. The court imposed consecutive
terms of one year and four months, or one-third the middle term, for each of the two remaining counts of the same offense (§§ 459, 460, subd. (a)), thus imposing a subordinate term of two years and eight months. The court doubled this aggregate subordinate term to five years and four months, again because of appellant's strike (§ 1170.12). Finally, the court enhanced the sentence by five years for appellant's admitted prior serious felony conviction term (§ 667, subd. (a)). The aggregate term thus totaled 14 years and 4 months. The court ordered appellant to pay a $200 restitution fine and granted him 462 days' total presentence credit.
Before appellant entered his plea, the court advised him of the constitutional rights he would be waiving and the direct consequences of his plea. Appellant expressly waived his constitutional rights and knowingy a nd voluntarily pleaded guilty and admitted the enhancements.
Appellant was represented by counsel throughout the proceedings.
There was no sentencing error.
There are no issues that require further briefing.
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur:
Marchiano, P. J.
Swager, J.
Page 1 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|