Does a court err by failing to instruct on attempted criminal threat as a lesser included offense of criminal threat?

In view of the evidence discussed above, the trial court did not err by failing to instruct on attempted criminal threat as a lesser included offense of criminal threat because there is no substantial evidence that defendant committed the lesser offense, but not the greater. (People v. Breverman, supra, 19 Cal.4th at p. 162.)

The Attorney General correctly states that the trial court orally imposed a one year term for defendant's section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancement, but neither the minute order for the sentencing hearing nor the abstract of judgment reflects that term. The Attorney General asks that we order the abstract of judgment modified accordingly. Defendant does not address the issue in his reply brief. Although the trial court stated at the sentencing hearing that he was sentencing defendant to a term of 16 years, four months (the total term reflected on the abstract of judgment, but a term that would not include a one year term under section 667.5, subdivision (b)), it expressly stated that it was imposing "an additional year" "for the prior prison term." Accordingly, we order the abstract of judgment modified to reflect the trial court's oral imposition of a one year term for defendant's section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancement. (People v. Crabtree (2009) 169 Cal.App.4th 1293, 1328.)