P. v. Warr CA2/6

Filed 6/20/13 P. v. Warr CA2/6 Reposted to correct index line; no change to text NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B240627 (Super. Ct. No. MA054155 & MA054636) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

MICQUAWN C. WARR,

Defendant and Appellant.

This appeal involves two cases: MA054155 and MA054636. In MA054155 a jury found Micquawn Warr (appellant) guilty of possession of marijuana for sale. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11359.) The jury found true an "on bail" allegation. (Pen. Code, § 12022.1.) Appellant admitted one prior serious or violent felony conviction ("strike") within the meaning of California's "Three Strikes" law. (Id., §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) In MA054636 a jury found appellant guilty on count 1, transportation of marijuana (Health & Saf. Code, § 11360, subd. (a)), and on count 2, possession of marijuana for sale. (Id., § 11359.) The jury found true an "on bail" allegation and a prior strike allegation. In MA054636 the trial court imposed the upper term of four years on count 1, transportation of marijuana, doubled to eight years because of the strike, plus two

1

years for the "on bail" allegation. On count 2, possession of marijuana for sale, the court imposed a concurrent sentence of the middle term of two years, doubled to four years because of the strike. The total prison sentence for MA054636 is 10 years. In MA054155 the trial court imposed a consecutive sentence of eight months (one-third the middle term of two years), doubled to one year, four months because of the strike. The court struck the "on bail" allegation. Thus, the aggregate sentence for both cases is 11 years, 4 months. Appellant's sole contention on appeal concerns MA054636. He argues that, pursuant to Penal Code section 654 (section 654), the trial court should have stayed execution of the four-year sentence imposed on count 2, possession of marijuana for sale. We agree and modify the judgment accordingly. MA054636: Facts1 Police officers followed a vehicle until it stopped in an alley by an apartment complex. The officers approached the vehicle and saw a bag of marijuana inside. ( Appellant was the sole occupant of the vehicle. The officers ordered appellant out of the vehicle and searched it for marijuana. They recovered 47.7 grams. An expert opined that the marijuana was possessed for sale. Discussion " 'Section 654 precludes multiple punishments for a single act or indivisible course of conduct. [Citation.]' [Citation.] ' "Whether a course of criminal conduct is divisible . . . depends on the intent and objective of the actor." ' [Citation.] '[I]f all of the offenses were merely incidental to, or were the means of accomplishing or facilitating one objective, defendant may be found to have harbored a single intent and therefore may be punished only once. [Citation.] [¶] If, on the other hand, defendant harbored "multiple criminal objectives," which were independent of and