The People v. Mallett CA4/3

INTRODUCTION

In defendant Clyde Lee Mallett‟s original appeal from his conviction for possession of cocaine (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)), we rejected his contention that his sentence of 28 years to life under the “Three Strikes” law constituted cruel and unusual punishment. However, we conditionally reversed the judgment and remanded the matter to the superior court with directions to conduct another in camera hearing on defendant‟s Pitchess1 motion and to create a record of the files reviewed. (People v. Mallett (Dec. 22, 2011, G045094) [nonpub. opn.].) On remand, the trial court held the in camera hearing and found no discoverable information. The court then reinstated the judgment. Defendant again appeals and asks that we independently review the in camera hearing to determine whether the trial court properly denied his Pitchess motion. We conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding no discoverable material in the officers‟ personnel files. Defendant also argues he is entitled to be resentenced under the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Reform Act), enacted as part of Proposition 36, because his conviction was not final at the time the Reform…