P. v. Ritchie
Appellant Justin Ritchie appeals from convictions for residential burglary (Pen. Code, 459, count 1),[1]grand theft firearm ( 487, subd. (d)(2), counts 2-4), ex-felon in possession of a firearm ( 12021, subd. (a)(1), count 5), and possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a), count 6). Before jury trial, appellant waived his constitutional rights and admitted he had a previous felony conviction which qualified as a strike under the Three Strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and as a serious felony ( 667, subd. (a)). He also admitted he served a separate prison term for a prior conviction. ( 667.5, subd. (b).)
Several issues are raised on appeal. First, appellant contends the trial court erred in concluding a prima facie case for discovery had not been made pursuant to Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess). Second, he contends he should only have been convicted of one count of grand theft firearm, an issue conceded by respondent. Third, he contends the court erred in imposing an additional term of imprisonment on count 5, ex felon in possession of a firearm, arguing that section 654 should have precluded the additional term. Finally, he challenges imposition of the upper term on count 1 pursuant to Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 (Blakely). Appellant contends that the imposition of an upper term sentence for the burglary conviction is in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial under Blakely. Court disagree.
Comments on P. v. Ritchie