California v. Montalvo

Posing as undercover police officers, defendant Robert Montalvo and a female associate committed two robberies: they took money from a couple at a hotel, and they pretended to be conducting a prostitution sting operation and stole money from their target. In a hotel room where defendant was eventually arrested, police discovered rock cocaine and a glass smoking pipe. Defendant was ultimately convicted of multiple crimes including first- and second-degree robbery. After striking one of two prior serious felony conviction allegations, the trial court sentenced defendant to a determinate term of 25 years in state prison and a consecutive one-year term in county jail. On appeal, defendant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented to convict him, and he alleged multiple errors with the trial proceedings. In the published portion of its opinion, the Court of Appeal rejected defendant’s contention that there was insufficient evidence of the “force or fear” element of robbery. In the unpublished portion of its opinion, the Court agreed the admission of the statement of the nontestifying victim given to the investigating officer violated the confrontation clause, but the error was harmless. The Court corrected sentencing errors, requiring it to: (1) strike the section 667(a)(1) enhancements imposed on count 2 and imposed and stayed on count 3; (2) dismiss the section 667.5(b) prior prison term enhancement; (3) order that execution of the sentences imposed on counts 8 and 9 be stayed pursuant to section 654; and (4) remanded and order that the trial court impose a full-term sentence on count 3 and stay execution thereof pursuant to section 654. Also, given the statutory change in section 667(a), the Court remanded for the trial court to consider whether to exercise its discretion to dismiss or strike that enhancement allegation pursuant to section 1385. As so modified, the Court affirmed. View "California v. Montalvo" on Justia Law