P. v. Curtwright
A jury convicted defendant Mark Robert Curtwright and codefendant Raymundo Andres Fabila of second degree burglary (Pen. Code, 459), receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, 496, subd. (a)), and possession of burglary tools (Pen. Code, 466), and also convicted defendant Curtwright of possession of a dirk (Pen. Code, 12020, subd. (a)). The trial court sustained a strike allegation against defendant Curtwright and sentenced him to six years in prison. For codefendant Fabila, the court imposed a three-year term. On appeal, defendant Curtwright contends: (1) his upper term sentences violate the rule of Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296 [159 L.Ed.2d 403] (Blakely); and Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. ___ [166 L.Ed.2d 856] (Cunningham); (2) the courts decision not to stay sentences pursuant to Penal Code section 654 is contrary to Blakely and Cunningham; (3) Californias determinate sentencing scheme cannot be reformed in light of Cunningham; (4) due process and double jeopardy prevents resentencing for Blakely and Cunningham error; (5) the court erred in not staying his sentences for possession of a dirk and possession of burglary tools; and (6) there are errors in the abstract and minute order. Codefendant Fabila contends on appeal that his upper term sentences violate Blakely and Cunningham and he must be resentenced to the middle term. We stay defendant Curtwrights sentence for possession of burglary tools, order the abstract modified, and otherwise affirm.
Comments on P. v. Curtwright