P. v. Smith
The jury found defendant Michael Kejuan Smith guilty of two weapons-related offensescarrying a loaded firearm in violation of Penal Code section 12031, subdivision (a)(1),[1]specially finding he was not the weapons registered owner ( 12031, subd. (a)(2)(F)), and felon in possession of a firearm ( 12021, subd. (a)(1)). In a separate trial, the jury found defendant suffered a prior serious or violent felony conviction under the three strikes law ( 667, subds.(b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) for federal armed bank robbery (18 U.S.C. 2113(a)-(d)) with the further finding defendant used a firearm in committing the offense (18 U.S.C. 924(c)). Defendant received the upper term sentence of three years in state prison for the section 12031 offense, which was doubled under the three strikes law. The court stayed imposition of an identical concurrent sentence under section 654. In his timely appeal, defendant contends the evidence of his federal bank robbery conviction is legally insufficient to support a finding of a serious or violent felony under California law, and the trial court violated his Sixth Amendment jury trial right by imposing the upper term for his convictions without a jury finding on the aggravating factors pursuant to Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270 [127 S.Ct. 856] (Cunningham) and Blakely v. Washington (2004) 542 U.S. 296, 301 (Blakely). Court disagree and affirm.
Comments on P. v. Smith