Any time he is looking at depends on his prior convictions. You indicate he has two prior prison allegations (+1 year each) but don't mention what those offenses we're. If they were strike offenses the time he is facing could be increased. The 459 - 2nd degree carries a term of 16 months, 2 years or 3 years in state prison and the 667.5(b) allegations are 1 additional year each.
The problem with your question is that we do no know what has happened or what will happen because there simply isn't enough information nor can we predict the course of events. There can be a plea bargain without the need to go to trial. In such a bargain, the Defendant would agree to plead "guilty" "or no contest" to the charges in exchange for a reduction in the amount of jail time, additional charges being dropped, or sentencing enhancements eliminated. He could also get probation, but given the prior I doubt that. I can only provide information on what you have given us here and what the "maximum exposure" (the max time he can do) the defendant could potentially face.
The first charge is burglary. Pen. C §459. From the facts, it appears that the place robbed was not a residential dwelling which would make the crime burglary in the second degree. Burglary in the second degree carries a "low mid high" term of 2, 4, 6 years respectively. So maxing that out gives him 6 years. Now, because he has a prior whatever the base term is, using the max again as an example, the judge will double it. So 12 years on this charge.
Pen C §667.5(a) is a prior conduct enhancement. It requires a current violent felony under Pen C §667.5(c) (here Burglary) with a prior violent-felony prison commitment. It then adds 3 years to the current charge. We are up to 15 years max.
Pen C §667.5(b) is a prior conduct enhancement. It requires a current felony with a prior prison term or county jail term of more than 1 year imposed or when sentence is not suspended for any felony. This adds an additional year, so we are up to 16 years max.
Once again, this is probably worst case scenario.
For informative purposes only. The attorney does not contemplate an attorney/client relationship being formed simply by providing information here nor is one thereby formed without a written contract for that attorney's services.
Did the female friend do the shoplifting? Seems extreme to charge him with 459 where you indicate possibly that he was only looking in the aisles.
Hire an attorney immediately to go over this in advance.
Curt Harrington Patent & Tax Law Attorney Certified Tax Specialist by the California Board of Legal Specialization PATENTAX.COM This communication is general information and not legal advice, and does not create an attorney-client relationship. This communication should not be relied upon as any type of legal advice. Please note that no attorney-client relationship exists between the sender and the recipient of this message in the absence of either (1) a signed fee contract and (2) remission of an agreed-upon retainer. Absent such an agreement and retainer, I am not engaged by you as an attorney, nor is any other member of my law firm.
Just being present at a crime doesn't make a person an accomplice. Some sort of knowledge and assistance would be required for your friend to be found guilty. Your friend should contact a local defense attorney right away to ensure the best possible result. I've been a defense attorney in North County for a number of years and have handled similar cases a number of times. Please feel free to have your friend contact my office for a free consultation.
The amount of time he is looking at depends on his prior record, whether he has any prior strikes, number of prison priors, etc. Your friend should consult with a local experienced criminal attorney. Many criminal attorneys such as myself offer free consultations and if he does not yet have an attorney, he should consult with some regarding the specifics of his case.
Law Offices of David M. Boertje 402 W. Broadway, Suite 950 San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 229-1870 *Please note that this is not legal advice and in no way formed an attorney-client relationship*