The People v. Hernandez CA4/3

DISCUSSION

Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (b), provides as pertinent: “When a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and the statute specifies three possible terms, the choice of the appropriate term shall rest within the sound discretion of the court. . . . The court shall select the term which, in the court’s discretion, best serves the interests of justice. The court shall set forth on the record the reasons for imposing the term selected . . . .” Similarly, the court must state its reasons for denying probation. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 4.406(b)(2); see People v. Golliver (1990) 219 Cal.App.3d 1612, 1616-1617.)

2 Defendant argues the court failed to satisfy these requirements “because the reasons cited by the court (1) were inseparable from the crime for which appellant was convicted . . .; (2) were based on an erroneous assumption of law, i.e., that appellant’s criminal behavior caused the victim’s serious injuries; (3) and appeared to be motivated by the court’s antipathy toward the available sentence range provided by the statute.” We disagree. In denying probation, the court stated it relied on “the nature, seriousness and circumstances of the crime. . . .…