P. v. Preciado

Filed 5/16/06  P. v. Preciado 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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  This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.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

                        Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Robert

R. Fitzgerald, Retired Judge.  (Pursuant to Cal. Const., art. VI, §  21.)  Affirmed.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

                        Steven Schorr, 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, Lilia E. Garcia and Janelle Boustany, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

                         Ruben Preciado was convicted of 17 counts of armed robbery and one count of possessing a firearm while a felon.  He was also found to have suffered eight prior serious or violent felony convictions and served three prior prison terms.  The court sentenced him to 630-years-to-life in prison.  He contends there is insufficient evidence to support one of the robbery counts, and the court's response to a jury question about that count was prejudicially erroneous.  He also makes some bootless sentencing arguments.  Finding no basis to disturb the judgment, we affirm. 

*          *            *

                        Preciado committed a string of commercial robberies, one of which occurred at a Sav-on drug store in Orange.  Store supervisor Ulrich Gaisrucker was counting the safe money at the front of the store when Preciado approached him with a gun.  Preciado demanded the money, and Gaisrucker obliged.  As he was handing over the loot, Steve Smith, a loss prevention agent with Sav-on, came upon the scene.  Preciado turned his gun on him, ordering him to the floor.  He then fled with the money.     

                        In his testimony, Gaisrucker described Smith as a fellow supervisor.  Smith testified his job was to do â€