What is the test for "not more than a certain term of imprisonment" in a sexual assault case?

Although the rule refers to the "specification of the punishment," and "a prison sentence of a specified length," the case law has not been so restrictive in its application of the rule. In People v. Tucker (1986) 187 Cal.App.3d 295, 231 Cal.Rptr. 671, the defendant entered a guilty plea to three sex offenses with the condition that he receive a sentence of "not more than 10 years." (Id. at p. 296, 231 Cal.Rptr. 671.) The trial court imposed an eight-year prison term. On appeal, appellant argued the sentence was erroneous because the trial court had failed to state its reasons for imposing a consecutive sentence on one count. The appellate court affirmed. First, it noted the plea bargain was "tantamount to an agreement, or stipulation, that a 10-year prison term was within the range of reasonableness for the crimes ... committed." (Id. at p. 296, 231 Cal.Rptr. 671.) Second, the court held rule 440 applied to plea bargains "where, ... the defendant has agreed to a sentence of 'not more' than a certain term of imprisonment." (Id. at p. 297, 231 Cal.Rptr. 671.)