People v. Chambers

Opinion

YEGAN, Acting P. J.

Robert J. Chambers was convicted in a court trial and appeals from the judgment sentencing him to prison for 13 years. The information alleged that he had committed a second degree robbery and had personally used a firearm in the commission of the offense. (Pen. Code, §§ 211, 12022.5, subd. (a)(1), 12022.53, subd. (b).)

1

Neither at trial nor at sentencing did the trial court expressly find that the personal use of a firearm allegation was true. As we shall explain, it impliedly did so because it

[1049]

imposed a 10-year prison term for the enhancement. We reject appellant’s contention that the absence of an express finding requires that the 10-year enhancement be stricken. Accordingly, we affirm.

Facts and Procedural History

While working as a cashier at a 7-Eleven convenience store, Abdel Munwar was confronted by three robbers. One was wearing a white and yellow shirt and yellow shorts. He put a firearm to Munwar’s head. The robbers took money from the store and fled.

Police Sergeant Edward Medrano was patrolling the area and saw appellant and another person running from the 7-Eleven. Appellant was wearing a white and yellow shirt and yellow shorts. Something was in his hands. Sergeant Medrano pursued the suspects on foot. Appellant’s accomplice jumped over a fence and escaped. Appellant jumped over a different fence but became trapped in an enclosed area. He was arrested. The money taken in the robbery and a firearm were found near him. The firearm was “consistent with the . . . look of the object” that Sergeant Medrano had earlier seen in appellant’s hands.

A videotape of the robbery was played at trial. Sergeant Medrano testified that appellant was the robber in the videotape who was uniquely clad in a white and yellow shirt.

The trial court found appellant guilty but did not mention the use of a firearm allegation. The minutes simply state: “DISPOSITION: FOUND GUILTY—CONVICTED BY COURT.”

At the probation and sentencing hearing both counsel and the trial court proceeded as if a true finding on the personal use of a firearm allegation had been made. At no time below did appellant object to the imposition of a 10-year prison term for the enhancement.