P. v. Adarkwa
Filed 1/23/09 P. v. Adarkwa CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. FRANCIS K. ADARKWA, Defendant and Appellant. | B207457 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA333148) |
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County.
Drew E. Edwards, Judge. Modified in part; affirmed in part.
Richard Jay Moller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Linda C. Johnson and Joseph P. Lee, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
_______________
Appellant Francis Adarkwa pled no contest to one count of identity theft in violation of Penal Code[1]section 530.5 case number SA062256. He was given a two-year sentence, suspended, and placed on probation. While on probation, appellant was convicted, following a jury trial, of three counts of grand theft in violation of section 487, subdivision (a), and 11 counts of forgery in violation of section 470, subdivision (d) in this case, number BA333148.
The convictions in this case also constituted a violation of appellant's probation in case number SA062256. Appellant was sentenced to the previously suspended term of two years for his identity theft conviction in case number SA062256. The trial court sentenced appellant to the upper term of three years for the count 1 grand theft conviction in this case, to run consecutively to the two year term in case number SA062256. The court stayed the sentences on all the other terms in the present case.
Appellant appeals from the judgment of conviction, contending that the trial court erred in imposing the full consecutive mid-term of two years for his identity theft conviction. Respondent agrees. We agree as well, and correct appellant's sentence in case number SA062256 to eight months, which is one-third the mid-term. Appellant's total sentence for the two cases is three years and eight months.
Facts
The facts of the case are not necessary to a resolution of the issue raised on this appeal and so are omitted.
Discussion
Appellant contends that the trial court erred in imposing the full mid-term for the identity theft conviction because it also imposed a full term for the grand theft conviction in the current case. He contends that pursuant to section 1170.1, the sentence for the identity theft should be one-third the mid-term. Respondent agrees. We agree as well.
Section 1170.1, subdivision (a) provides in pertinent part: "The principal term shall consist of the greatest term of imprisonment imposed by the court for any of the crimes, including any term imposed for applicable specific enhancements. The subordinate term for each consecutive offense shall consist of one-third of the middle term of imprisonment prescribed for each other felony conviction for which a consecutive term of imprisonment is imposed, and shall include one-third of the term imposed for any specific enhancements applicable to those subordinate offenses."[2] Therefore, we agree with appellant and respondent that the sentence for the identity theft conviction should be eight months.
Disposition
Appellant's sentence for his conviction for identity theft in case number SA062256 is corrected to eight months. The judgment of conviction is affirmed in all other respects. Pursuant to stipulation of the parties, the remittitur in this case shall issue immediately. The trial court is directed to prepare a corrected abstract of judgment and forward it forthwith to the Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
ARMSTRONG, J.
We concur:
TURNER, P. J. KRIEGLER, J.
Publication Courtesy of California attorney referral.
Analysis and review provided by Vista Property line attorney.
San Diego Case Information provided by www.fearnotlaw.com
[1] All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.
[2] Section 1170.1, subdivision (a) applies "when any person is convicted of two or more felonies, whether in the same proceeding or court or in different proceedings or courts, and whether by judgment rendered by the same or by a different court."
