Villegas

Defendant and appellant Hector Villegas, a sex offender subject to registration, was convicted by jury in count 2 1 of failure to file a change of address. (Pen. Code, § 290.013, subd. (a).) 2 In count 3, defendant was convicted of failing to notify the responsible agency of his new address. (§ 290.013, subd. (b).) The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison in count 2 for the upper term of three years, enhanced by one year for a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The same sentence was imposed as to count 3 but stayed under section 654.

Defendant contends that one of his convictions must be reversed because subdivisions (a) and (b) of section 290.013 “describe alternate and mutually exclusive theories for the same offense,” with subdivision (a) requiring the jury to find defendant knew where he was moving but subdivision (b) requiring the jury to find defendant did not know his new address at the time *645 of the move. Defendant also argues the abstract of judgment must be amended to conform to the oral pronouncement of judgment, a point properly conceded by the Attorney General. We order modification to the abstract of judgment and otherwise…