People v. McCloud CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 25, 2026E083402California2,986 words

Opinion

Opinion

I. BACKGROUND

In 2000, McCloud was convicted of possessing a controlled substance (Health &

Saf. Code, § 11350). McCloud admitted that he had served four prior prison terms

(former § 667.5, subd. (b)) and suffered three prior strike convictions (§§ 667, subds. (c)

& (e), 1170.12, subd. (c)). (People v. McCloud (Nov. 2, 2001, E029184) [nonpub. opn.].)

His first strike was in 1977 for first degree burglary (§ 459), and his second and third

strikes were in 1984 for forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2)) and forcible rape in concert

with another (§ 264.1). Accordingly, under the “Three Strikes” law (§§ 667, 1170.12),

the trial court sentenced McCloud to a determinate term of four years and an

indeterminate term of 25 years to life. We affirmed the judgment in 2001. (People v.

McCloud, supra, E029184.)

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 In 2022, the trial court resentenced McCloud under section 1172.75, which we

detail further below. Over multiple hearings, the trial court dismissed the prison priors

under section 1172.75, but it rejected both McCloud’s argument that he should be

resentenced as a second strike defendant under the Reform Act and a…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.