The Court of Appeal held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the appellant’s Romero motion and sentencing him to an aggregate term of 60 years to life. The court did not properly consider the nature of the appellant’s offenses (both prior and current), his age, his struggles with substance abuse, or the total sentence imposed. On remand, the court must consider all relevant mitigating factors (not just the ones previously mentioned) and redetermine whether a mental health expert should be appointed to evaluate the appellant’s mental and developmental issues, which may have resulted in or affected him when committing the qualifying strike offenses. The court additionally agreed with the parties that two of the appellant’s sentences must be stayed pursuant to Penal Code section 654.