Anderson

This case involves the application of Penal Code section 667, subdivisions (b) to (i), popularly known as the “Three Strikes Law,” which was enacted as emergency legislation and became effective March 7, 1994. Defendant appeals from the judgment, contending the imposition of the five-year enhancement for a prior serious felony conviction under section 667, subdivision (a)(1), in addition to the doubling of the base term under subdivision (e)(1), is barred by the terms of the Three Strikes Law and by section 654. Defendant also contends that his prior serious felony conviction does not qualify as a “strike” for purposes of subdivisions (b) to (i) and that the doubling of a subordinate term for a subsequent count is similarly barred. Finally, he claims the court err-ed in sentencing him consecutively for an enhancement to that subordinate term. We reject all of defendant’s claims and affirm the judgment.

Statement of the Case

Defendant pled no contest to and was found guilty of two counts of robbery (§211) and the use of a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)) as to each count. He also admitted two prior convictions, one for which he served a prison term under section 667.5,…