Rodriguez

People v. Rodriguez

Good Law
1988 Cal. App. LEXIS 1143·206 Cal. App. 3d 517·253 Cal. Rptr. 633
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 8, 1988B034336California928 words

Opinion

Opinion

Abbe, J.

The People appeal an order striking the prior enhancement term (Pen. Code, § 1238, subd. (a)(6) and (10).) The issue presented is whether a single conviction and single period of incarceration for such conviction may be used both to upgrade petit theft from a misdemeanor to a felony under section 666 and to enhance the sentence under section 667.5, subdivision (b). We hold this is proper.

Respondent pled guilty to a 1987 petty theft (§ 484) and admitted he suffered a previous conviction for robbery in 1983 for which he served a separate term in prison. Upon sentencing, the court struck the one-year enhancement term on the ground that to impose the term would be an improper dual use of facts. The court erred. There is no prohibition on the dual use of such facts.

Penal Code section 666 provides in pertinent part: “Every person, who having been convicted of. . . robbery and having served a term therefor in any penal institution ... is subsequently convicted of petit theft, then the person ... is punishable by imprisonment ... in the state prison.”

Penal Code section 667.5 states in pertinent part: “Enhancement of prison terms for new offenses because of prior prison…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.