P. v. Yagle
James Michael Yagle was convicted of possessing methamphetamine (Health & Saf. Code, 11377, subd. (a)). On appeal, he contends that the imposition of the upper term sentence violated his Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial as set forth in Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466 (Apprendi), Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 (Blakely), and Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. [127 S.Ct. 856] (Cunningham). He also argues that his custody credits were improperly calculated. The Attorney General concedes that the custody credits were improperly calculated, and argues that the trial court failed to impose various mandatory financial obligations at sentencing. Under the authority of People v. Black (2007) 41 Cal.4th 799 (Black II), we reject Yagles constitutional argument. With respect to the remaining sentencing claims, Court remand for correction of Yagles custody credits and imposition of appropriate financial obligations.
Comments on P. v. Yagle