P. v. Rincon
This case involves two defendants, Jose Juan Rincon (Rincon) and Dominick Haning, Jr. (Haning). A jury found Rincon and Haning guilty of the same crimes: (1) first degree burglary (Pen. Code, § 459);[1] (2) shooting at an occupied aircraft (Pen. Code, § 246); (3) shooting at an inhabited dwelling (Pen. Code, § 246); (4) fleeing a pursing peace officer and disregarding the safety of others while driving (Veh. Code, § 2800.2); (5) exhibiting a firearm with the intent of preventing arrest (§ 417.8); (6) driving a stolen vehicle (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)); and (7) being a felon or drug addict in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, § 12021, subd. (a)(1)).
In regard to one count of shooting at an aircraft (§ 246), the jury found true the allegations that Rincon and Haning personally used a firearm during the commission of the offense (§ 1192.7, subd. (c)(8)). Haning admitted suffering (1) one prior strike conviction (§ 667, subds. (c) & (e)(1)); (2) one prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)); and (3) one prior conviction for which he served a prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced Rincon to prison for a term of 13 years. The trial court sentenced Haning to prison for a term of 32 years.
Rincon raises two issues on appeal. First, Rincon asserts the evidence supporting his burglary conviction does not meet the substantial evidence standard. Second, Rincon contends the trial court erred by not staying the sentences for various convictions. (§ 654.) Haning contends the trial court erred by not staying the sentences for some of his convictions because the crimes involved an indivisible course of conduct. (§ 654.) We affirm the judgments.
Comments on P. v. Rincon