P. v. James CA2/16
Aaron James appeals challenging only the sentence imposed. Specifically, James contends the court erred in imposing five-year terms for each of the alleged serious felony priors (Pen. Code, § 667, subd. (a)(1)). The three convictions resulted from a single proceeding, thus only one five-year term could lawfully be imposed. Second, James argues we must reverse the true finding on the one year prison prior in light of Senate Bill No. 136, which modified the definition of a “prison prior.” The Attorney General correctly agrees James could only receive one five-year enhancement for the serious felony convictions and that we should strike the true finding on the prison prior.
Comments on P. v. James CA2/16