From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re A.G.

Court of Appeal of California
Apr 1, 2010
G041415 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2010)

Opinion

No. G041415.

4-1-2010

In re A.G., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A.G., Defendant and Appellant.

Mark Ankcorn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Gary W. Schons, Assistant Attorney General, Lilia E. Garcia and Arlene A. Sevidal, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS


In a CVS pharmacy store, A.G., a minor, walked down the alcohol aisle and put a bottle of Grey Goose vodka into his coat pocket. He hesitated a moment and then pocketed a second bottle. He walked out of the store without paying for them. He was arrested and the juvenile petition charged him with commercial burglary (count 2) and petty theft (count 3). The juvenile court considered this petition along with two others (containing additional robbery charges) before sustaining all the counts and imposing a total maximum term of five years and six months. Relevant to this appeal, the juvenile court imposed consecutive sentences for the CVS commercial burglary and petty theft counts.

A.G. and the Attorney General agree the trial court erred in imposing a consecutive sentence for count 2 (four months) and count 3 (two months) pursuant to Penal Code section 654. (All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.) We also agree the sentence was in error. The record shows A.G. possessed a single objective and engaged in a single, continuous course of conduct when he committed these crimes, i.e., to steal alcohol from the store. There is ample case authority holding a defendant must be punished only once if he is convicted of both burglary and theft arising from the same criminal event. (See People v. Bernal (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1455, 1457-1458.)

We conclude the consecutive sentence of two months for the petty theft (count 3) violates section 654 and must be stayed. (See also People v. Le (2006) 136 Cal.App.4th 925, 931 [finding "appropriate" the Peoples concession consecutive sentences imposed for robbery and burglary of drugstore items violated section 654].)

The judgment is ordered modified to reflect the sentence on count 3, petty theft, is stayed pursuant to section 654. As so modified, we affirm the judgment. The clerk of the superior court is ordered to forward a copy of the corrected abstract of judgment to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Division of Juvenile Facilities.

WE CONCUR.

RYLAARSDAM, ACTING P. J.

ARONSON, J.


Summaries of

In re A.G.

Court of Appeal of California
Apr 1, 2010
G041415 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2010)
Case details for

In re A.G.

Case Details

Full title:In re A.G., a Person Coming Under the Juvenile Court Law. THE PEOPLE…

Court:Court of Appeal of California

Date published: Apr 1, 2010

Citations

G041415 (Cal. Ct. App. Apr. 1, 2010)