Webb

People v. Webb

Good Law
1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 777·7 Cal. App. 4th 575·8 Cal. Rptr. 2d 904·92 Daily Journal DAR 8299·1992 WL 134173
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 18, 1992D013124California1,814 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wiener, J.

In a criminal trial the court must decide whether an alleged prior felony conviction is an element of the pending offense or is information solely for the benefit of the court at sentencing. The reason for this is that where it is an element of the offense, article I, section 28, subdivision (f) of the California Constitution requires that the earlier conviction be proved to the trier of fact in open court. If it is only a factor to be considered at sentencing, the defendant can admit its truth under Penal Code section 1025 and prevent the jury from hearing about it when the charge is read or at any other time during trial. (See also § 1093.)

The issue here where the defendant, Ivor George Webb was charged with two counts of violating section 288, subdivision (a) and of having three prior convictions for sex offenses within the meaning of section 667.51, subdivision (d) is whether the court properly denied Webb’s request to admit his convictions resulting in the jury hearing evidence on the truth of the priors. Adopting the analysis used by the California Supreme Court in People v. Bouzas (1991) 53 Cal.3d 467 [ 279 Cal.Rptr. 847 , 807 P.2d 1076 ], we conclude that in…

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.