P. v. Sanchez
Filed 7/23/07 P. v. Sanchez CA2/1
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION ONE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. RICARDO SANCHEZ, Defendant and Appellant. | B192706 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA093790) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Cynthia Rayvis, Judge. Affirmed.
Jean Ballantine, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Assistant Attorney General, Linda C. Johnson, Theresa A. Patterson and Lisa J. Brault, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
__________________________________
When two sheriffs deputies spotted a speeding car and started to follow it, the car abruptly pulled over and stopped. The passenger got out of the car, dropped a shotgun to the ground, and ran off. The driver (Ricardo Sanchez) stayed at the scene and was arrested. After waiving his rights, Sanchez told the deputies that they had the shotgun for protection. The unregistered 12-gauge short-barreled shotgun was loaded, and the deputies found four live 12-gauge shotgun rounds on the floorboard of the drivers side of the car. Sanchez was arrested and charged, and later convicted of carrying a loaded unregistered firearm in a vehicle (count 2), possession of a firearm by a felon (count 3), and possession of ammunition by a felon (count 4), with true findings on allegations that he had suffered one prior strike and served one prior prison term. (Pen. Code, 12031, subd. (a)(1), 12021, subd. (a)(1), 12316, subd. (b)(1), 667, subds. (b)-(i), 667.5, subd. (b).)[1] He was sentenced to state prison for a term of eight years, four months. Sanchez appeals, claiming there were sentencing errors. We disagree and affirm the judgment.
DISCUSSION
Sanchezs sentence of eight years, four months, is comprised of the upper term of three years for count 2 (carrying a firearm in a vehicle), doubled to six years, plus 16 consecutive months for count 4 (possession of the ammunition by a felon), plus one consecutive year for the prior prison term. Imposition of the sentence on count 3 (possession of a firearm by a felon) was stayed.
A.
Sanchez contends the count 4 sentence should have been stayed because possession of the ammunition was incidental to the count 2 carrying charge. ( 654.) We disagree.
Although section 654 prohibits multiple punishments for crimes arising from a single act or indivisible course of conduct (People v. Britt (2004) 32 Cal.4th 944, 951-952), multiple punishments are permitted when independent criminal objectives were entertained (People v. Harrison (1989) 48 Cal.3d 321, 335). The trial court specifically found that Sanchez entertained multiple objectives, noting that the additional ammunition meant Sanchez could reload and fire as needed. To avoid this conclusion, Sanchez points to People v. Lopez (2004) 119 Cal.App.4th 132, 138, ignoring the factual distinction between his case and Lopez -- where the defendant was convicted of both possession of a firearm and possession of ammunition simply because he possessed a loaded firearm. (Id. at p. 138.) Lopez itself recognized the possibility of a case when multiple punishment is lawful for possession of a firearm and ammunition (ibid.) -- and this is that case -- because Sanchez possessed both a loaded firearm and additional live ammunition.
B.
Sanchez contends the upper term sentence on count 2 and the consecutive sentence on count 4 cannot survive Cunningham v. California (2007) ___ U.S. ___, 127 S.Ct. 856. We disagree.
The trial court imposed the upper term sentence based upon Sanchezs recidivist conduct, including his numerous prior convictions and the fact that he was on parole at the time of the current offenses. Accordingly, there was no Cunningham error with regard to either the upper term or the consecutive sentence. (Cunningham v. California, supra, 127 S.Ct. at pp. 860, 864-865; Almendarez-Torres v. United States (1998) 523 U.S. 224, 239-247; People v. Black (2007) ___ Cal.4th ___, 2007 WL 2050875.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
VOGEL, Acting P.J.
We concur:
ROTHSCHILD, J.
JACKSON, J.*
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line Lawyers.
______________________________________________________________________________
*Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
[1] All section references are to the Penal Code. Count 1 charged Sanchez with possession of a short-barreled shotgun in violation of section 12020, subdivision (a)(i), but the jury found him not guilty of that count.
