Perez

People v. Perez

Good Law
195 Cal. App. 4th 801
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 2011No. D056301; No. D056442California1,299 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Benke, J.

In this case, in proving the occurrence of prior convictions the prosecution relied upon certified copies of the appellants’ “prison packets.” We reject the appellants’ contention admission of the packets violated the confrontation clause of the Sixth Amendment. The documents in the prison packets were prepared for nontestimonial purposes and as such were admissible hearsay. Moreover, the certificates by which the prison packet documents were authenticated attested to matters which are outside the protection of the Sixth Amendment.

*803 Like the Attorney General, we agree each of four $600 fines imposed on one appellant under Penal Code 1 sections 1202.4 and 1202.44 must be reduced to $200 and that a one-year prior prison enhancement imposed on the other appellant must be stricken.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

A jury convicted appellants Michael Eugene Perez and Keith Maurice Hill of burglary. The jury also found true allegations the burglary was of an inhabited dwelling and that another person, other than an accomplice, was present in the dwelling during the commission of the crime. (§§ 459, 460, 667.5, subd. (c)(21).)

The trial court found Perez suffered a…

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.