People v. Sanford CA2/5

Filed 12/7/20 P. v. Sanford CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B303464

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. BA248066)

ROBERT LIONEL SANFORD,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael D. Abzug, Judge. Affirmed. James R. Bostwick, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant Robert Sanford (defendant) was convicted of a single count of robbery (Pen. Code,1 § 211) in 2004. The trial court found true allegations that defendant sustained four prior serious felony convictions (§ 667(a)(1)), served three prior prison terms (§ 667.5(b)), and sustained four prior felony convictions within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§§ 667(b)-(i), 1170.12). The trial court struck three of defendant’s prior strike convictions in the interest of justice pursuant to section 1385 and sentenced defendant to serve 30 years in prison. Defendant filed a series of motions challenging his sentence in 2019. This appeal concerns defendant’s October 2019 motion to vacate and correct an unauthorized sentence. Citing People v. Tassel (1984) 36 Cal.3d 77 (Tassel), defendant argued prior conviction enhancements under section 1170.1 do not attach to particular counts but instead are added just once as the final step in computing the total sentence. The trial court denied the motion, believing Tassell had been overruled and, regardless, its reasoning did not apply to defendant’s sentence.2 In a motion for reconsideration, defendant contended the holding in Tassell was reaffirmed in People v. Sasser (2015) 61 Cal.4th 1 (Sasser). The trial court denied the motion for reconsideration.