P. v. Dorsey
Filed 4/5/06 P. v. Dorsey CA4/3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. EDWARD DEWAYNE DORSEY, Defendant and Appellant. | G034957 (Super. Ct. No. 03NF3450) O P I N I O N |
Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Ronald P. Kreber, Judge. Affirmed.
Tracy J. Dressner, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Gil Gonzalez and Andrew Mestman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant Edward Dewayne Dorsey challenges his conviction for brandishing a firearm, possession of a firearm by a felon, and street terrorism. He contends the court erred by rejecting his offer to stipulate that the existence of his prior robbery conviction constituted a predicate crime to the street terrorism charge, and allowing the prosecution to introduce evidence showing the specific nature of the prior conviction. We find no error. Evidence of defendant's prior robbery conviction was admissible, despite his offer to stipulate, because it demonstrated his knowledge about the gang and its activities.
He further contends that, after the court sentenced him on the possession of a firearm count, it erred by not staying the sentences on the brandishing and street terrorism counts. He asserts all three counts arose from the same act. We conclude that his conduct furthered three different criminal objectives. Thus, we affirm.
FACTS
Defendant stayed in the same apartment complex as the victim's aunt. The victim visited his aunt every day after work; he often saw defendant going in or out of apartment 50. On October 31, 2003, the victim had parked his car at his aunt's apartment complex and was walking to her apartment when he saw defendant go by in a passing car. Defendant started â€
