Hill

People v. Hill

Good Law
119 Cal. App. 4th 85·13 Cal. Rptr. 3d 905
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 25, 2004A100958California2,541 words

Opinion

Opinion

McGUINESS, J.

David Lavell William Hill (appellant) pleaded guilty to two counts of second degree robbery resulting from an incident involving two victims. As to each count, he admitted to a sentencing enhancement that he had personally used a gun during the robbery. At sentencing, designating one robbery count as the principal offense and the other robbery count as the subordinate offense, the trial court imposed consecutive sentences for the robbery counts and the related gun-use enhancements under Penal Code, section 1170.1, subdivision (a).

In the published portion of the opinion, we address appellant’s contention that the trial court erred as a matter of law in calculating the sentence for the gun-use enhancement related to the subordinate robbery count. As part of the subordinate term, the trial court imposed three and one-third years (one-third of the upper term of 10 years) for the related gun-use enhancement. Appellant contends that under section 1170.1, subdivision (a), the trial court was required to impose one and one-third years, using the middle term of four years. We conclude the trial court was not so limited. It had the discretion to use any of the enhancement’s terms…

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.