P. v. Visser



















Filed 9/18/12 P. v.
Visser CA3











NOT
TO BE PUBLISHED



California
Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or
relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except
as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This
opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for
purposes of rule 8.1115.





IN THE COURT OF
APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THIRD APPELLATE
DISTRICT

(Shasta)












>

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. JASON EARL VISSER, Defendant and Appellant.

C067610 (Super. Ct. Nos. 08F9819, 08F3451, 08F9779 and 09F0011)

Defendant Jason
Earl Visser entered negotiated guilty pleas to theft-related charges in three cases and
was granted probation. Ultimately,
however, he was sentenced on some charges to which he had not entered a plea, and not
sentenced on other crimes to which he had
entered a plea. We agree with the
parties that these cases must be remanded to the trial court for pronouncement
of sentence.

>BACKGROUND

On March 23, 2009, defendant entered
guilty pleas in cases numbered 08F9819, 08F9779, and 09F0011 before the trial
court (per Judge Ruggiero) as follows:

In case 09F0011,
to count 1 (second degree burglary), to be selected the primary term;

In case 08F9779,
to count 1 (petty theft with a prior); and

In case 08F9819,
to count 2 (petty theft with a prior), count 4 (second degree burglary), count
6 (petty theft with a prior), and count 7 (second degree burglary). All “remaining cts/cases” were to be
dismissed, in exchange for a sentence “lid” of six years, four months. Imposition of sentence was suspended in these
three cases and defendant was granted probation.[1]

On September 18, 2009, after defendant
admitted violating his probation, the trial court (per Judge Beatty) imposed
sentence as follows:

In case 08F9819,
on count 1 (selected as the primary term), three years; on count 2, eight
months; on count 3, eight months; and on count 4, eight months;[2]

In case 09F0011,
on count 1, eight months; and

In case 08F9779,
on count 1, eight months. The aggregate
sentence imposed was six years, four months.
Execution of sentence was suspended, and probation reinstated.

On August 10, 2010, following admissions
by defendant that he had violated his probation, the court (by Judge Ruggiero)
ordered “the previously imposed state
prison term, six year, four months be executed at this point.”[3]


>DISCUSSION

When a defendant
is convicted on multiple counts, the trial court has a duty to pronounce
sentence on each conviction and impose a punishment authorized by law. (Pen. Code, § 12; People v. Cheffen (1969) 2 Cal.App.3d 638, 641-642.) The failure to pronounce sentence on a count
of which defendant has been convicted has been found to constitute an
unauthorized sentence (People v. Price
(1986) 184 Cal.App.3d 1405, 1411, fn. 6); the same is surely true of a sentence
imposed upon a charge to which the defendant did not plead guilty and which was
dismissed pursuant to a plea bargain.

As defendant was
sentenced on counts to which he did not plead guilty, and not sentenced on
counts to which he did plead guilty, the current sentence is unauthorized. We shall remand the matter for pronouncement
of sentence.

>DISPOSITION

The matters are remanded for
pronouncement of sentence in a manner consistent with the plea bargain and this
opinion. In all other respects, the
judgment is affirmed. Following
pronouncement of sentence, the trial court shall prepare an amended abstract of
judgment and forward it to the Department
of

Corrections and Rehabilitation.





BLEASE , Acting P. J.



We concur:




NICHOLSON , J.







BUTZ , J.