McGlothin

People v. McGlothin

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 885·67 Cal. App. 4th 468·79 Cal. Rptr. 2d 83·98 Daily Journal DAR 11103·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8008
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaOctober 26, 1998A082166California3,578 words

Opinion

Opinion

Corrigan, J.

Here we reverse an order of the trial court striking a serious felony prior, because the court ignored the “Three Strikes” sentencing scheme articulated by the Legislature and substituted its own private view of an appropriate sentence. In doing so, the court failed to follow sentencing guidelines set out in the California Rules of Court and in case law. The court also ignored its own conclusions about the crimes themselves and the defendant who committed them. Such actions constitute an abuse of discretion.

Facts

Shortly after 11 p.m., 75-year-old Winford Beasley and 68-year-old Harriet Razo left the Fairfield Bowl and walked to Mr. Beasley’s car. While Ms. Razo got in the car and Mr. Beasley put their bowling equipment in the trunk, two men approached. The taller of the two grabbed Mr. Beasley and threatened to kill him unless he relinquished his money. One assailant hit Mr. Beasley, then both men wrestled him to the ground. The larger man held Mr. Beasley, while the smaller man tried unsuccessfully to secure Mr. Beasley’s wallet, tearing Mr. Beasley’s trousers to pieces in the process. Mr. Beasley’s glasses were knocked off and his hearing aid was damaged during the…

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.