Calderon

People v. Calderon

Good Law
1993 Cal. App. LEXIS 1162·20 Cal. App. 4th 82·26 Cal. Rptr. 2d 31·93 Daily Journal DAR 14718·93 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8604
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 24, 1993G012721California2,367 words

Opinion

Opinion

Crosby, J.

This is our second review of this case. In the first (GO10983), we reversed a count of attempted robbery with directions to dismiss because it was a lesser included offense of a completed robbery set forth in another count. This would have potentially reduced Manuel Lopez Calderon’s twenty-three-year, four-month sentence by one year. We remanded for resentencing to allow the court to restructure the sentence in its discretion. By changing a stayed sentence on one count to a consecutive one, the judge reimposed the original term. We now affirm.

I

Calderon first questions the reasons given by the judge for giving a number of consecutive terms. The sentence was constructed in this manner: First, the court correctly noted defendant was statutorily ineligible for probation (Pen. Code, § 1203.06, subd. (a)(l)(ii) [commission of robbery with use of a firearm]). The judge then announced, “And it’s my intentions [szc], so that you’ll understand what I’m doing, to reimpose the 23-years- and-one-third sentence that was previously imposed.”

Only the sentence on count 1 changed, and the court dealt with it last. Count 14 was selected as the base term. That was an attempted murder…

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.