People v. Miller

Bad Law
145 Cal. App. 4th 206·2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1871·2006 Daily Journal DAR 15533·51 Cal. Rptr. 3d 421·2006 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 10905
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 28, 2006H029672California4,102 words

Opinion

Opinion

Bamattre-Manoukian, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

Defendant Timothy Desmond Miller entered into a negotiated plea agreement in which he pleaded no contest to one felony count in each of three drug offense cases in exchange for an aggregate sentence of either six years or six years eight months. The length of the aggregate term was to be determined by the trial court at the time of sentencing. The trial court chose the longer aggregate sentence of six years eight months pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.1.

On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court failed to exercise its sentencing discretion because the court erroneously determined that the longer aggregate sentence of six years eight months was required under Penal Code section 1170.1. For reasons that we will explain, we find that defendant’s contention has merit and therefore we will reverse the judgment and remand the matter to allow the trial court to exercise its discretion under Penal Code section 1170.1.

H. BACKGROUND

The factual circumstances of defendant’s offenses are not reflected in the record on appeal. Defendant entered into a negotiated plea agreement that included a waiver of his right to a preliminary hearing and a waiver…

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.