Lambeth

Appellant was convicted after jury trial of robbery with the personal use of a firearm (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 12022.5). He appeals from the judgment.

Dual Use of Facts

Appellant first contends that the trial court improperly made dual use of the fact of his gun use to enhance his sentence and to impose an upper base term.

The trial court sentenced appellant as follows: “The Court: Well, it’s unfortunate in this case. Defendant has demonstrated that he is a very serious danger to the general public, not only to property, but to the general public. Certainly would not be an adequate candidate for probation, let alone the use-a-gun-go-to-prison law.

“There are considerable circumstances in aggravation in this offense. The crime involved violence and threat of great bodily harm. Did use a weapon at the time of the commission of the offense. There was planning and professionalism in the carrying out of the crime. Defendant’s prior convictions as an adult are numerous and increasing seriousness. He has served prior prison terms. Apparently was an escapee from the Federal Institution at the time of the commission of the offense.

“Did not appear to be any circumstances relating…