Is a sentence based on facts not found by the jury or admitted by appellant pursuant to the Sixth Amendment?

Citing Cunningham v. California (2007) 549 U.S. 270 [166 L.Ed.2d 856], appellant argues that the three-year upper term sentence on Count 11 was based on facts not found by the jury or admitted by appellant, thereby violating his Sixth Amendment to jury

Page 9

trial.⁵ Appellant, however, was sentenced after the 2007 amendment of section 1170, subdivision (b) which provides that a sentencing court may consider the full range of sentences. Additional fact finding was not required to impose an upper term. (People v. Sandoval (2007) 41 Cal.4th 825, 846-847.) "[A] trial court is free to base an upper term sentence upon any aggravating circumstance that the court deems significant, subject to specific prohibitions. [Citations.]" (Id., at p. 848.)