Dominguez

People v. Dominguez

Good Law
102 Cal. App. 4th 880·125 Cal. Rptr. 2d 874
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 1, 2002B154266California1,643 words

Opinion

Opinion

We publish this opinion as an entreaty to the criminal trial courts to follow the sentencing rules and make record which permits intelligent appellate review. This is not the first time that the Court of Appeal has reversed for the trial court's failure to comply with its duties pursuant to Penal Code section 654. [1] In People v. Lowe (1975) 45 Cal.App.3d 792, 796 , 119 Cal.Rptr. 699 , the Court of Appeal, in no uncertain terms, criticized the trial court for failure to adhere to the requirements of section 654. It noted that failure to do so increased the workload of the Court of Appeal and wasted the money of the taxpayers. Those observations are here apposite. This appeal, while important to the instant litigants, is pedestrian and could have been mercifully affirmed had the trial court made an appropriate record.

William Dominguez appeals from the judgment after a jury convicted him, as an aider and abettor, of second degree robbery (§ 211) and assault with a firearm (§ 245, subd. (a)(2)) with special findings that a principal was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)). The trial court sentenced him to prison for three years on the robbery count, one year…

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.