P. v. Mba
Filed 10/27/06 P. v. Mba CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. IKENNA MBA, Defendant and Appellant. | B188367 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA247199) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael E. Pastor, Judge. Affirmed.
Patricia J. Ulibarri, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Bill Lockyer, Attorney General, Robert R. Anderson, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and David E. Madeo, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
__________________________________
A jury convicted Ikenna Mba of assault by means likely to produce great bodily injury, found he was sane at the time he committed the crime, and found true an allegation that he personally inflicted great bodily injury. (Pen. Code, §§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 12022.7, subd. (a).)[1] Based on Mba’s admissions, the trial court found true allegations that he had suffered two prior serious or violent felony convictions, one of which qualified as a strike, and had served one prior prison term. (§§ 667, subds. (a), (b)-(i), 667.5, subd. (b).) Mba was sentenced to state prison for a term of 17 years -- high term of four years for the assault, doubled because of the prior strike, plus three years for the great bodily injury enhancement, five years for the prior felony conviction, and one year for the prior prison term. Mba appeals, claiming his high term sentence must be reversed because the facts on which it is based (the crime involved great violence and viciousness and demonstrated serious danger to society, and his prior convictions were numerous and of increasing seriousness) were neither found by a jury nor admitted by him. (United States v. Booker (2005) 543 U.S. 220; Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296; Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466.)
Leaving to one side the Attorney General’s claim of waiver and recognizing that the Blakely issue is presently pending before the United States Supreme Court in Cunningham v. California, No. 05-6551 (cert. granted Feb. 21, 2006, 126 S.Ct. 1329), we are presently bound to follow People v. Black (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1238 and reject Mba’s claim on this ground. (Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962) 57 Cal.2d 450, 455.)[2]
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
VOGEL, J.
We concur:
MALLANO, Acting P.J.
JACKSON, J.*
______________________________________________________________________________
*Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
Publication Courtesy of San Diego County Legal Resource Directory.
Analysis and review provided by El Cajon Property line Lawyers.
[1] Subsequent undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.
[2] Because the issue was not raised below, we decline Mba’s request to correct his award of custody credits. (People v. Mendez (1999) 19 Cal.4th 1084, 1100.)
