People v. Wilkerson CA2/8

DISCUSSION

Defendant’s sole contention on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion in declining to strike his 2013 prior conviction for first degree burglary. He says the conviction was remote in time, he was only 19 when he committed the burglary, and he was suffering from substance abuse issues. Defendant argues that a second strike sentence would still have provided lengthy punishment, and the sentence imposed by the court was excessive and “serves no rational purpose.” Trial courts are vested with the discretion to strike prior felony convictions in accordance with Penal Code section 1385 and the interests of justice. (Romero, supra, 13 Cal.4th at pp. 529-531.) Romero instructs that the statutory phrase “ ‘in furtherance of justice’ ” requires a sentencing court to consider both “ ‘ “the constitutional rights of the defendant, and the interests of society represented by the People.” ’ ” (Id. at p. 530, italics omitted.) People v. Williams (1998) 17 Cal.4th 148, 161 describes the inquiry generally as follows: The sentencing court “must consider whether, in light of the nature and circumstances of [the defendant’s] present felonies and prior serious and/or violent…