Barkley

Defendant Christopher Lenn Barkley was convicted by jury trial of possession for sale or purchase for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5). A court trial was held on allegations that he had suffered a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Defendant admitted that he had suffered a prior conviction for violating Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1). However, he contended that the conviction did not qualify as a strike because it had been sentenced as a misdemeanor. The court found the allegations true. Defendant was committed to state prison for a term of nine years, which included a doubled midterm for the possession offense due to the strike prior.

On appeal, defendant claims that the trial court erred in concluding that his prior conviction was a felony. 1 We conclude that the record supports the trial court’s conclusion that the prior conviction was a felony, and we affirm the judgment.

I. Procedural Background

Defendant was charged by amended information with possession for sale or purchase for sale of cocaine base (Health &…

I concur in the judgment.

I write separately because I do not join the analysis in the penultimate paragraph of the majority opinion distinguishing People v. Glee (2000) 82 Cal.App.4th 99 [ 97 Cal.Rptr.2d 847 ]. I agree with my colleagues that under Glee , the reviewing court properly focused on whether the trial court intended to impose a felony sentence. In this case, the judge taking the plea clearly intended to impose a felony sentence and the sentencing judge did not indicate any disagreement with the first judge, in spite of the ambiguous language during sentencing. For this reason, following Glee , I would affirm the judgment.

Appellant’s petition for review by the Supreme Court was denied December 23, 2008, S167872. Werdegar, J., did not participate therein.

Defendant Christopher Lenn Barkley was convicted by jury trial of possession for sale or purchase for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5). A court trial was held on allegations that he had suffered a prior strike conviction (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and served a prison term for a prior felony conviction (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b)). Defendant admitted that he had suffered a prior conviction for violating Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1). However, he contended that the conviction did not qualify as a strike because it had been sentenced as a misdemeanor. The court found the allegations true. Defendant was committed to state prison for a term of nine years, which included a doubled midterm for the possession offense due to the strike prior.

On appeal, defendant claims that the trial court erred in concluding that his prior conviction was a felony. [1] We conclude that the record supports the trial court's conclusion that the prior conviction was a felony, and we affirm the judgment.

Defendant was charged by amended information with possession for sale or purchase for sale of cocaine base (Health & Saf. Code, § 11351.5),…