204 Cal. App. 4th 1034
Cal. Ct. App.2012Background
- Appellant was convicted by a jury of assault with a deadly weapon with personal-use and great-bodily-injury findings, plus two prior strikes and a prior prison term, resulting in a 29-to-life sentence as a three-striker.
- The prior strikes stem from 1998 offenses where appellant beat a homeless man, left him for dead, then returned 30 minutes later and kicked him three times; the juvenile court warned in 1999 that those would count as two strikes.
- Appellant argued the two 1999 strike convictions arose from a single act and should count as one strike under Burgos.
- The trial court rejected Burgos, treating the two 1999 strikes as separate; the court found the acts occurred at different times and were not a single act.
- On Romero review, the trial court weighed appellant’s background and the nature of his current offenses and denied striking one or both priors as outside the Three Strikes spirit.
- The Court of Appeal affirmed, concluding that there was no abuse of discretion and appellant remained within the Three Strikes framework.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Burgos requires counting two priors as one strike | Finney: two priors arose from one act; Burgos favors one strike | People: priors are separate acts; not subject to Burgos | No; Burgos distinguished; two priors here are separate acts; sustained |
| Whether Romero motion to strike was properly denied | Finney: extraordinary circumstances warrant striking priors | People: career criminal with persistent violence; not outside Three Strikes | Yes; trial court did not abuse discretion in denying Romero motion |
| Whether the 1998 strikes were properly treated as two strikes | Finney: same incident; should count as one | People: time separation and discrete acts support two strikes | Yes; acts separated in time; two strikes |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Burgos, 117 Cal.App.4th 1209 (Cal. App. 2004) (ambiguity of multiple priors from closely connected acts; discretion to strike prior convictions)
- People v. Benson, 18 Cal.4th 24 (Cal. 1998) (serious felony conviction constitutes a strike even if stayed; discusses close-connection scenarios)
- People v. Scott, 179 Cal.App.4th 920 (Cal. App. 2009) (proximity and relatedness of priors are sentencing factors when striking)
- People v. Williams, 17 Cal.4th 148 (Cal. 1998) (guides Romero balancing factors for strike consideration)
- People v. Carmony, 33 Cal.4th 367 (Cal. 2004) (outside the spirit of the Three Strikes requires extraordinary circumstances)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero), 13 Cal.4th 497 (Cal. 1996) (Romero motion standard for striking priors)