Opinion
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
Superior Court County of Santa Barbara No. 1260147 Clifford R. Anderson III, Judge.
Linda C. Rush, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Dane R. Gillette, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Pamela C. Hamanaka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Alene M. Games, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
COFFEE, J.
Jonathan G. Roman appeals from judgment after conviction by jury of making criminal threats (Pen. Code, § 422), corporal injury to a cohabitant (§ 273.5, subd. (a)), attempted criminal threats (§§ 422/664), first degree burglary (§ 459), and vandalism. (§ 594, subd. (a)(1).)
All statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated.
The trial court imposed and suspended execution of a sentence of seven years four months. The sentence consisted of a six-year upper term for burglary as the principal term; two consecutive terms of eight months each for criminal threats and for vandalism (one-third the middle term of two years); a concurrent eighteen month term for the attempted criminal threat (one-half the upper term of three years for the crime attempted); and a four-year upper term for corporal injury to a cohabitant, stayed pursuant to section 654.
Appellant contends that the sentence for the attempted criminal threat was unauthorized, because, as a consecutive subordinate term, it should have consisted of one-third the middle term. (§ 1170.1, subd. (a).) We disagree and affirm because the sentence was concurrent, and therefore not subject to the principal and subordinate computation scheme of section 1170.1, subdivision (a).
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
We do not set forth the facts underlying appellant's conviction because they are not material to the issue raised on appeal.
DISCUSSION
The 18-month concurrent sentence for the attempted criminal threat was authorized. The punishment for a crime attempted is one-half the term of imprisonment prescribed for the offense attempted. (§ 664.) The term of imprisonment prescribed for the offense attempted, making criminal threats, is 16 months, two or three years. (§§ 18, 422.) The court imposed one-half the three-year upper term. Imposition of the full base term was appropriate because the sentence was concurrent with the principal term. A court calculates a total determinate sentence by adding the principal term, one-third the middle term for any crimes that are ordered to run consecutively to the principal term (§ 1170.1, subd. (a)), and the full base term for any crimes that are ordered to run concurrently to the principal term. Concurrent terms are not part of the principal and subordinate term computation; they are imposed at the full base term. (People v. Thompson (2009) 177 Cal.App.4th 1424, 1432.)
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur: YEGAN, Acting P.J., PERREN, J.