Norris

People v. Norris

Bad Law
115 Cal. Rptr. 2d 540·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 588·2002 Daily Journal DAR 769·95 Cal. App. 4th 475·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 613
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 2002B149731California1,627 words

Opinion

Opinion

Coffee, J.

Kevin Dwane Norris appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted Mm of petty theft with a prior. (Pen. Code, § 666.) He contends the trial court erred when it made a true finding on a prior prison term enhancement, having previously granted a motion under section 1118 to “acquit” Mm of that allegation. We conclude that section 1118 does not apply to recidivist allegations and affirm the judgment.

Facts and Procedural History

Appellant shoplifted three ceiling fan remote controls from Home Depot and was apprehended by store security. The Los Angeles County District Attorney filed an information charging Mm with petty theft with a prior and alleging that he had suffered two prior convictions under the “Three Strikes” law and had served seven prior prison terms under section 667.5, subdivision (b). One of the prior prison term allegations was based on a 1989 conviction of sale of a substance in lieu of a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11350.

After the jury returned a guilty verdict on the charged petty theft, a bifurcated court trial was held on the Three Strikes and prison prior allegations. At the beginning of this…

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.