P. v. Inman
Defendant was convicted by a jury of four counts of assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, 245, subd. (a)(2)) and one count each of assault of a peace officer (id. at 245, subd. (d)(1)), discharge of a firearm at an occupied vehicle (id. at 246), possession of a firearm by a felon (id. at 12021, subd. (a)(1)), possession of ammunition by a person prohibited from owning or possessing a firearm (id. at 12316, subd. (b)(1)), and reckless driving while fleeing a peace officer (Veh. Code, 2800.2). He was acquitted of two other counts of discharging a firearm at an occupied vehicle but, on each count, was convicted of the lesser included offense of negligent discharge of a firearm. (Pen. Code, 246.3.) Finally, defendant was acquitted of attempted murder. (Id. at 664/187, subd. (a).)
Following discharge of the jury, the court found defendant had a prior strike (Pen. Code, 1170.12, subds. (b) and (c)), was convicted of a prior serious felony (id. at 667, subd. (a)), and served a prior prison term (id. at 667.5, subd. (b)).
Defendant was sentenced under the three strikes law to an aggregate, unstayed term in state prison of 54 years. He appeals, contending: (1) the jury was improperly admonished to conceal misconduct; (2) the conviction for assault on a peace officer is not supported by substantial evidence; (3) the jury was improperly instructed on an element of the charge of fleeing a peace officer; (4) the trial court improperly polled the jury; (5) the prior strike finding is not supported by substantial evidence; (6) imposition of the upper term on two of the offenses violated his Sixth Amendment rights; and (7) the abstract of judgment must be corrected. Court agree the abstract of judgment must be modified to reflect accurately the sentence imposed by the court but otherwise affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Inman