People v. Lazalde CA5

DISCUSSION

I. Correction of Sentence

The parties agree, as do we, that the trial court relied on the same 1991 conviction to impose both a one-year prior prison term enhancement pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b) and a five-year prior serious felony enhancement pursuant to section 667, subdivision (a). Under these circumstances, the one-year prior prison term enhancement must be stricken. (People v. Jones (1993) 5 Cal.4th 1142, 1149-1150 [remanding to trial court with directions to strike]; People v. Perez (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 801, 805.)

II. Correction of Minute Order and Abstract of Judgment

The parties also agree that the minute order and abstract of judgment must be corrected not only to reflect the striking of this enhancement, but also to reflect the sentence as orally pronounced by the trial court. “[A] trial court’s oral sentence governs if it is different from what appears in a minute order or an abstract of judgment [citations] .…” (People v. Wynn (2010) 184 Cal.App.4th 1210, 1221; People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 185 [courts may correct clerical errors at any time and may order correction of abstracts of judgment that do not accurately…