P. v. Gonzalez
Appellant Raul Gonzalez was found guilty after a jury trial of attempted forcible kidnapping (Pen. Code, §§ 664 & 207, subd. (a), count one), attempted carjacking (Pen. Code, §§ 664 & 215, subd. (a), count two), robbery (Pen. Code, § 211, count three), and failing to notify authorities of his status as a registered sex offender (Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (f)(1), count four).[1] The jury found true allegations that appellant suffered a prior serious felony conviction within the meaning of the three strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (b) – (i) & 1170.12, subds. (a) – (d)) and that appellant had a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). Appellant contends the trial court failed to instruct the jury on theft, the lesser included offense to robbery. Appellant also contends the attempted kidnapping and robbery counts were part of an indivisible course of conduct and the court violated section 654 in sentencing him on both counts. The case is remanded to the trial court to amend clerical errors in the clerk's minutes and abstract of judgment and to forward them to the appropriate authorities. The amended documents shall reflect appellant's sentence on count three was doubled pursuant to the three strikes law and that he received a five-year enhancement pursuant to section 667, subdivision (a). The judgment is affirmed.
Comments on P. v. Gonzalez