P.

DISCUSSION

On the substantive offenses, the court gave appellant eight years for assaulting a police officer with a firearm. (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (d)(1).)1 Pursuant to section 654, the court stayed his sentences for shooting from and at a motor vehicle. (§§ 12034, subd. (d) & 246.) And for the crime of recklessly evading the police, the court gave appellant a concurrent sentence of three years. (Veh. Code, § 2800.2.) As to all four offenses, the jury found true a one-year enhancement allegation that appellant was armed with firearm. (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1).) With regard to the first three offenses, the court stayed the enhancement under section 654. However, on the reckless evasion count, the ordered the enhancement to run consecutively to that count. The court also gave appellant four years for having served four prior prison terms. (§ 667.5, subd. (b).) It is undisputed that imposition of the one-year firearm enhancement on the reckless evasion count was improper. Because the court imposed a concurrent sentence on that count, it could not impose a consecutive enhancement. (People v. Bui (2011) 192 Cal.App.4th 1002, 1016.) In curing this error on remand, the trial court is…