Does Section 669, subdivision (a) of the California Criminal Code, section 669 of the Criminal Code apply to a life sentence for a convicted rapist who has been sentenced to life in prison without a chance of parole?

Section 669, subdivision (a) provides, in part: "When a person is convicted of two or more crimes, whether in the same proceeding or court or in different proceedings or courts, and whether by judgment rendered by the same judge or by different judges, the second or other subsequent judgment upon which sentence is ordered to be executed shall direct whether the terms of imprisonment or any of them to which he or she is sentenced shall run concurrently or consecutively. Life sentences, whether with or without the possibility of parole, may be imposed to run consecutively with one another, with any term imposed for applicable enhancements, or with any other term of imprisonment for a felony conviction. . . ." Subdivision (b) of section 669 provides, in part: "Upon the failure of the court to determine how the terms of imprisonment on the second or subsequent judgment shall run, the term of imprisonment on the second or subsequent judgment shall run concurrently." (See also People v. Rogers (1967) 252 Cal.App.2d 1015, 1020.)

Because the trial court did not state whether the indeterminate terms were to be served concurrently or consecutively, those terms are to run concurrently by operation of law. ( 669, subd. (b); People v. Rogers, supra, 252 Cal.App.2d at p. 1020.) The indication in the minute orders and abstracts of judgment that the terms were to be

Page 57

consecutive does not change the terms to consecutive terms. A discrepancy between the oral pronouncement and the minutes is resolved in favor of the oral pronouncement. (People v. Mesa (1975) 14 Cal.3d 466, 471.)