People v. Culp CA5

INTRODUCTION

This case presents a straightforward question of statutory interpretation: Does Penal Code section 181 apply to state prison terms imposed for attempted extortion pursuant to section 524? We conclude that it does and reject defendant’s argument to the contrary. As a result, we will affirm the judgment while ordering one minor change to the abstract of judgment.

BACKGROUND

There was evidence adduced at trial that defendant and several accomplices kidnapped a man and attempted to extort $50,000 from his boss.2 Defendant, who had been charged with several crimes, was only convicted of one: A lesser included offense of attempted extortion. The court sentenced defendant to a total of six years in prison: Three years on the attempted extortion conviction, which was doubled due to defendant’s prior strike. (§ 667, subd. (e).) Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that his sentence is not authorized by the relevant statutes.

DISCUSSION

I. THE PARTIES’ CONTENTIONS AND STATUTORY BACKGROUND

Defendant argues that his six-year prison term was impermissibly long because attempted extortion is only punishable by a prison term of one year or less. (§ 524.) Even if that…