Mantanez
People v. Mantanez
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Huffman, J.
Following convictions for possession of heroin and receiving stolen property, with true findings as to four “strike” prior convictions and a subsequent life sentence under the “Three Strikes” law (Pen. Code, 2 § 667, subds. (b)-(i)), Rodolfo Torres Mantanez appeals. Mantanez argues the evidence does not support his conviction for receiving stolen property, his suppression motion was erroneously denied, and also, relying on recent cases decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Mantanez argues his sentence is cruel and unusual in light of the relatively minor nature of the present offenses of which he was convicted.
For the reasons which follow, we reject the challenges to the sufficiency of and admission of the evidence. Also, as we believe the Ninth Circuit cases noted above were not correctly decided, we decline to follow them, and we affirm the judgment and sentence imposed on Mantanez herein.
Factual Background
On September 21, 2000, in Carlsbad, the Oak Street home of Mariana Ramirez was burglarized and some of her jewelry was taken. On the evening of October 4, 2000, Carlsbad Police Officer George Hart, patrolling Chestnut Street, not…
Concurring Opinion
McINTYRE, J.
I agree with the reasoning and conclusions of the majority as to the sufficiency of the evidence and the legality of the initial police contact with defendant. I also agree that the sentence imposed here does not violate the constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment. However, as I believe the extensive discussion of federal case law is unnecessary, I concur in the result only.
The trial court here concluded defendant’s lengthy criminal history brought him within the spirit of the three strikes law. As the majority admits, the trial court’s decision may be affirmed using the analysis expressed in Salem v. Helm (1983) 463 U.S. 277 [ 103 S.Ct. 3001 , 77 L.Ed.2d 637 ] and In re Lynch (1972) 8 Cal.3d 410 [ 105 Cal.Rptr. 217 , 503 P.2d 921 ], which *368 includes a consideration of defendant’s recidivist background. I believe this analysis is sufficient to affirm the judgment. Therefore, I believe the majority’s extended exposition of the interplay of the United States Supreme Court decisions in Rummel v. Estelle (1980) 445 U.S. 263 [ 100 S.Ct. 1133 , 63 L.Ed.2d 382 ], Solem v. Helm, supra, 463 U.S. at pages 284-288 [103 S.Ct. at pages 3006-3009] and Harmelin v.…
Opinion
Certified for Partial Publication. [1]
HUFFMAN, Acting P.J.
Following convictions for possession of heroin and receiving stolen property, with true findings as to four "strike" prior convictions and a subsequent life sentence under the "Three Strikes" law (Pen.Code, [2] § 667, subds. (b)-(i)), Rodolfo Torres Mantanez appeals. Mantanez argues the evidence does not support his conviction for receiving stolen property, his suppression motion was erroneously denied, and also, relying on recent cases decided by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Mantanez argues his sentence is cruel and unusual in light of the relatively minor nature of the present offenses of which he was convicted.
For the reasons which follow, we reject the challenges to the sufficiency of and admission of the evidence. Also, as we believe the Ninth Circuit cases noted above were not correctly decided, we decline to follow them, and we affirm the judgment and sentence imposed on Mantanez herein.
On September 21, 2000, in Carlsbad, the Oak Street home of Mariana Ramirez was burglarized and some of her jewelry was taken. On the evening of October 4, 2000, Carlsbad Police Officer George Hart,…