After Senate Bill No. 567, the People are not required to plead aggravating factors relating to defendant’s prior convictions. Defendant was convicted of multiple sex crimes, and sentenced after the amendments by SB 567 went into effect. Defendant appealed, arguing that the trial court’s imposition of upper term sentences was unauthorized because the People did not plead any aggravating factors. Held: Affirmed (but clerical credits error corrected). In imposing the upper term, the trial court relied on defendant’s certified “RAP sheet.”  SB 567 did not provide a right to a jury trial with respect to aggravating factors pertaining to prior convictions (citing § 1170, subd. (b)(3) [the court may consider the defendant’s prior convictions based on a certified record of conviction].) The fact of a prior conviction encompasses a finding that prior convictions are numerous or of increasing seriousness, and a finding that defendant was on probation or parole at the time the crime was committed. The relevant statutes do not include a pleading requirement. Nor is there a due process right requiring the court to imply a pleading requirement because the Sixth Amendment rights under Apprendi v. New Jersey (2000) 530 U.S. 466, do not apply to sentence enhancement provisions that are based on a defendant’s prior conviction.

The full opinion is available on the court’s website here: https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C095843.PDF