Reasons for Sentencing Choice

Name: People v. Jones
Case #: C074824
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/30/2016
  • Categories: Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

Where trial court stated reasons for dismissing one of two strikes on the record, remand was not required for the court to provide written reasons in the minutes in light of subsequent amendment to Penal Code section 1385. Jones was…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Shenouda
Case #: E061954
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 09/11/2015
  • Categories: Abuse of Discretion, Base Term Selection, Probation, Probation / Parole / PRCS, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

Defendant's multiple uncharged sexual battery offenses supported the court's denial of probation and imposition of six-year midterm sentence for lewd acts upon a child. A jury convicted Shenouda of committing a lewd act upon a 13-year-old girl, Brianna, for grabbing…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Fuentes
Case #: G048563
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 3
Opinion Date: 04/20/2014
Subsequent History: Review granted 8/13/2014: S219109
  • Categories: Enhancements, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

Penal Code section 186.22, subdivision (g) does not eliminate the trial court's power to dismiss a section 186.22, subdivision (b) enhancement under Penal Code section 1385, subdivision (a). Fuentes pled guilty to two criminal offenses. Over the prosecution's objection, the…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Bonnetta
Case #: S159133
Court: CA Supreme Court
District CalSup
Opinion Date: 04/27/2009
  • Categories: Pronouncement, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

The requirement in Penal Code section 1385 that reasons for a dismissal be set forth in the minute order is mandatory. As part of a plea agreement, the trial court reached the agreed-upon sentence by striking most of the drug…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Quintanilla
Case #: B203825
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 5
Opinion Date: 01/22/2009
  • Categories: Consecutive Offenses, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

Under Penal Code section 667.6, subdivision(c), which authorizes imposition of a full consecutive sentence for specified sexual assaults, the court must identify criteria justifying the harsher sentence. Appellant was convicted of rape and forcible lewd and lascivious behavior on a…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Medrano
Case #: C056068
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 04/18/2008
  • Categories: Civil Commitments, Constitutional Rights, CRC, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

When a person is initially committed to the California Rehabilitation Center, the sentence imposed is, for practical purposes, only an interim sentence. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement in two cases, appellant was sentenced to five years in prison, with…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Abercrombie
Case #: C051865
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/24/2008
  • Categories: Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing, Three Strike Priors

Because parole status is a recidivism factor arising from a prior conviction, a defendant has no Sixth Amendment right to determination of parole status when it is used to enhance a sentence. Appellant was convicted of several counts of molestation…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. McFearson
Case #: F051882
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 5 DCA
Opinion Date: 01/07/2008
Subsequent History: 4/9/08 Rev. granted: S160601
  • Categories: Enhancements, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

The trial court erred when it used a fact that resulted in an enhanced sentence to also impose an aggravated term. The trial court used appellant's three prior convictions to impose an aggravated sentence, and used the same convictions to…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Jeffery
Case #: B187352
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 08/22/2006
  • Categories: Civil Commitments, CRC, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

Appellant pleaded no contest to several drug offenses and the trial court agreed to sentence her to a prison term of five years, and refer her for a psychological evaluation pursuant to Welfare and Institutions Code section 3051, to determine…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Benitez
Case #: C044648
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 03/29/2005
Subsequent History: Rhrg. den. 4/15/05
  • Categories: Areas Constitutional Law, Due Process, Probation, Probation / Parole / PRCS, Reasons for Sentencing Choice, Sentencing

Blakely v. Washington (2004) 159 L.Ed.2d 403 does not require a jury to determine the facts upon which a determination of probation eligibility is predicated. A denial of probation is not punishment, and a grant of probation results in a…

View Full Summary