Murillo

People v. Murillo

Good Law
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 1069·39 Cal. App. 4th 1298·46 Cal. Rptr. 2d 403·95 Daily Journal DAR 14667·95 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8518
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 1, 1995H013138California2,769 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wunderlich, J.

Statement of the Case

Defendant Joel Medina Murillo was convicted of residential burglary after a court trial. The court further found true allegations that he suffered two prior serious felony convictions. Thereafter the court struck one of the prior convictions. It sentenced defendant under the three strikes law (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i) ) and imposed an eight-year term for the burglary, i.e., double the midterm because of his prior burglary conviction. (See § 667, subd. (e)(1).) However, the court declined to impose an additional five-year enhancement for that prior conviction.

The People appeal from an order striking a prior conviction. They claim the court erred in striking it on grounds that the plea did not meet constitutional requirements and defendant was not advised of the immigration consequences of the plea. (See § 1238, subd. (a)(1) and (a)(10).) The People also appeal from the sentence, claiming the court erred in failing to impose an additional five-year enhancement for the prior conviction. (See § 1238, subd. (a)(10).)

Defendant cross-appeals from the judgment. He claims the court erred in considering the remaining prior conviction a “strike”…

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.