In an earlier decision, we affirmed the judgment of conviction and sentence. People v. French, 141 P.3d 856 (Colo.App. 2005). However, on certiorari review, the supreme court vacated that judgment and remanded the case for reconsideration in light of People v. Huber, 139 P.3d 628 (Colo.
CRE 402; People v. Greenlee, 200 P.3d 363, 366 (Colo. 2009); People v. French, 141 P.3d 856, 860 (Colo.App. 2005), vacated and remanded, 165 P.3d 836 (Colo.App. 2007). Evidence is relevant when it has "any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence."
Thus, Isaacks considered facts that were assertedly Blakely-complaint, whereas here, the aggravation involves a prior conviction, which is Blakely-exempt. See Lopez v. People, supra; People v. French, 141 P.3d 856 (Colo.App. 2005). We do not read Isaacks to apply to Blakely-exempt prior convictions.