P. v. Fetissova
In a prior opinion, Court affirmed the convictions of Rimma Fetissova for conspiracy to solicit for a prostitute (Pen. Code, 266h, subd. (a)/182, subd. (a)(1)),[1]conspiracy to commit pandering ( 266i, subd. (a)(1)/182, subd. (a)(1)), soliciting for a prostitute ( 266h, subd. (a)), pandering ( 266i, subd. (a)(1)), and four counts of money laundering ( 186.10, subd. (a)). The jury found a true allegation that two money laundering counts involved in excess of $50,000. ( 186.10, subd. (c)(1)(A).) Fetissova was sentenced to nine years in state prison consisting of a six-year upper term on the
soliciting for a prostitute count, and consecutive terms of sixteen months on the pandering count and eight months and one year, respectively, on two of the money laundering counts. Other sentences were stayed. ( 654.) Fetissova contended that, because the sentences were based on aggravating factors determined by the court, the trial court's imposition of an upper term and consecutive sentences violated her constitutional right to a jury trial under the rules announced in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, and Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296. We rejected Fetissova's contention following the holding of our Supreme Court in People v. Black (2005) 35 Cal.4th 1238. Thereafter, the United States Supreme Court granted Fetissova's petition for writ of certiorari, vacated the judgment, and remanded the case for further consideration in light of Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. ___ [127 S.Ct. 856] which overruled Black, in part.
Accordingly, Court vacate the portion of the sentence imposing the upper term for the offense of soliciting for a prostitute, and remand for resentencing consistent with Cunningham. The trial court is directed to prepare an amended abstract of judgment in accordance with this opinion and deliver it to the Department of Corrections. In all other respects the judgment is affirmed.
Comments on P. v. Fetissova