P. v. Estudillo
Defendant and appellant Edmond Estudillo was convicted by jury of attempted robbery, in violation of Penal Code sections 664 and 211,[1]and attempted carjacking, in violation of sections 664 and 215, subdivision (a). Defendant admitted suffering three prior convictions within the meaning of the three strikes law ( 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d), 667, subds. (b)-(i)), three serious or violent felony convictions ( 667, subd. (a)),[2]and serving two prior prison terms ( 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court struck two of the prior convictions under the three strikes law. Defendant was sentenced to consecutive terms totaling 16 years 4 months, consisting of 9 years in state prison for attempted carjacking, 16 months for attempted robbery, 5 years for the serious felony conviction, and one year for the prior prison term. In this timely appeal, defendant argues the trial court erred by not staying the attempted robbery conviction pursuant to section 654. He also points out the abstract of judgment contains an error in the allocation of time for the recidivist allegations, although the total sentence reflected is accurate. Court order the abstract corrected and in all other respects affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Estudillo