Luna

People v. Luna

Bad Law
113 Cal. App. 4th 395·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1700·2003 Daily Journal DAR 12413·6 Cal. Rptr. 3d 539·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9905
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 17, 2003B164536California1,058 words

Opinion

Opinion

Turner, J.

Defendant, Justo Luna, appeals his felony conviction contending there is no substantial evidence he had previously been convicted of a serious felony. He relies on the holding of People v. Rodriguez (1998) 17 Cal.4th 253, 261 [ 70 Cal.Rptr.2d 334 , 949 P.2d 31 ], that evidence appearing on a superior court abstract of judgment was insufficient to prove a prior conviction was a serious felony. We conclude that the March 7, 2000, adoption by the voters of Proposition 21 modifies a small portion of the Rodriguez opinion which relates to the sufficiency of the evidence that a prior violation of Penal Code section 245, subdivision (a)(1) constitutes a serious felony. We therefore reject defendant’s sufficiency of the evidence contention and affirm the judgment.

After the jury found defendant guilty of second degree robbery, a court trial was held on the issue of whether his prior conviction was a serious felony thereby qualifying for enhanced sentencing pursuant to Penal Code sections 667, subdivision (e)(1) and 1170.12, subdivision (c)(1). The information, as amended, alleged defendant had been convicted of “PC 245(A)(1)” on August 11, 1994. At the court trial, the…

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.