Tipton

The sole issue in this appeal is whether the bifurcated trial required by People v. Bracamonte (1981) 119 Cal.App.3d 644 [ 174 Cal.Rptr. 191 ], survived the enactment of “The Victims’ Bill of Rights” commonly referred to as Proposition 8. We hold the requirement of a bifurcated trial was not affected by Proposition 8 and the denial of defendant’s request for bifurcation was prejudicial error.

Facts and Proceedings Below

Defendant David Tipton was charged by information with burglary. It was further alleged, for purposes of enhancement, he had suffered a prior felony conviction for robbery. Mr. Tipton pled not guilty and denied the prior conviction.

Before trial, defense counsel moved for a separate trial on the allegation of a prior felony conviction under the authority of Bracamonte . Relying on Proposition 8, the trial court denied the motion. As a result of this ruling Mr. Tipton admitted the prior conviction. The burglary charge was tried before a jury and Mr. Tipton was found guilty. The trial court imposed the midterm sentence plus a five-year enhancement for the prior robbery conviction.

Discussion

A. Methods of Proof Are Not Limitations on the Use of Prior…