California Court of Appeal

Affirmed. In 2002, Defendant was convicted of armed robbery and sentenced to 40 years which included firearms enhancements. Fifteen years later errors were noted in Defendant’s abstract of judgement. Defendant contends that the errors required a new hearing for sentencing. The trial court disagreed and simply corrected the errors in the abstract of judgment. The appeals court held that because the errors pertained only to the length of concurrent terms, correcting the errors did not change the other parts of his sentence.

Appellate Information

• Published 2019/08/01

Judges

• Rothschild

Court

• California Court of Appeal

Counsel