P. v. Stone
Filed 4/6/06 P. v. Stone CA3
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
(Shasta)
----
| THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. LESLIE GENE STONE, Defendant and Appellant. |
C050392
(Super. Ct. No. 05F0639)
|
A jury convicted defendant Leslie Gene Stone of grand theft. (Pen. Code, § 487, subd. (a).)[1] Defendant admitted a prior strike under the three strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and two prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced him to state prison for an aggregate term of six years.
On appeal, defendant claims: (1) his admissions to the two prior prison term enhancements were inadequate; and (2) the trial court erred by imposing a property theft fine in the amount of $31.50 pursuant to section 1202.5. Defendant's first argument lacks merit. The People concede error as to the fine, and we shall accept the concession and order the trial court to correct the abstract of judgment. We shall otherwise affirm the judgment.
DISCUSSION
I
Prior Prison Term Enhancements
Defendant claims that his admissions to the enhancements pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b), were inadequate. He alleges he was not informed of the allegations that he had served a prison term for each of the prior convictions. Defendant emphasizes that the enhancements apply to prior convictions for which a prison term was served and for which there is no intervening period of five years in which the defendant is free from prison custody and the commission of a new offense resulting in a felony conviction. (See § 667.5, subd. (b); People v. Tenner (1993) 6 Cal.4th 559, 563.) Defendant claims he admitted only the convictions themselves and not the other elements, i.e., the prison terms and the absence of a five-year washout period.
A. Background
In the complaint, each enhancement was charged separately. The complaint alleged specifically that defendant was convicted of separate felony offenses and served a term for each offense â€
