People v. Robles

Opinion

WOODS, J.

A jury convicted appellants Gilbert Robles (Robles) and Javier Mesa Uribe (Uribe) of attempted second degree robbery (Pen. Code,

[629]

§§ 664/211; statutory references, unless otherwise noted, are to the Penal Code) and found true an allegation Robles had used a knife (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). Robles and Uribe each admitted a serious felony conviction allegation (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 667, subd. (a)) and Uribe also admitted a state prison allegation (§ 667.5). Each was sentenced to 10 years in state prison.

Appellants raise the following issues:

Yurko

error

(In re Yurko

(1974) 10 Cal.3d 857 [112 Cal.Rptr. 513, 519 P.2d 561]); error to admit evidence of an uncharged offense (Evid. Code, § 1101, subd. (b)); instructional error (CALJIC No. 2.50, mod.);

Romero

error

(People

v.

Superior Court

(Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 [53 Cal.Rptr.2d 789, 917 P.2d 628]); and various “three strikes” (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)) claims.

We find all but one of appellants’ claims without merit. We agree with appellants’ claim that remand is required in order for the trial court to exercise its discretion to dismiss or not to dismiss serious felony allegations

(People

v.

Superior Court (Romero), supra,

13 Cal.4th 497.)

Factual Background

There being no insufficiency of evidence claim, the facts may be stated simply. Our perspective favors the judgment.