People v. Nguyen CA6

I. INTRODUCTION

Convicted in 2007 of attempted murder (Pen. Code §§ 664, subd. (a), 187)1 with firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)) and great bodily injury enhancements (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)) found true and sentenced to 5 years consecutive to 25 years to life, defendant John Nguyen appeals from a postjudgment order denying his request to modify the fourth amended abstract of judgment. Defendant contends that separate abstracts of judgment are required for his determinate and indeterminate terms. The Attorney General asserts that separate abstracts of judgment were prepared by the trial court. However, the Attorney General requests that we direct the abstract of judgment on defendant’s determinate sentence (determinate abstract of judgment) be modified to strike the term “1st degree.” In

All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. addition, regarding the abstract of judgment on defendant’s indeterminate sentence (indeterminate abstract of judgment), the Attorney General “questions whether the determinate offense should even be listed in the indeterminate abstract.” For reasons that we will explain, we will direct the trial court to…