Laino

People v. Laino

Bad Law
11 Cal. Rptr. 3d 723·2004 Cal. LEXIS 2991·2004 Daily Journal DAR 4325·32 Cal. 4th 878·87 P.3d 27
Supreme Court of CaliforniaApril 8, 2004S103324California8,331 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moreno, J.

In 1992, defendant pleaded guilty in Arizona to an aggravated assault with a handgun against his wife. As a condition of probation, he successfully completed a domestic violence “diversion” program in Arizona, which resulted in a judgment of dismissal. He argues that the Arizona judgment of dismissal effectively negated his earlier guilty plea under Arizona law, precluding its use as a prior conviction in the current proceeding. He also argues that the full faith and credit clause of the United States Constitution (U.S. Const., art. IV, § 1) precludes our court from deciding, under California law, whether his Arizona guilty plea constitutes a “strike” under California’s three strikes law.

We granted review to resolve the following issues: (1) whether California must give full faith and credit to the Arizona judgment of dismissal and thus decide, under Arizona law, whether defendant suffered a prior conviction for purposes of California’s three strikes law; and (2) assuming California law applies, whether the Arizona guilty plea, followed by a dismissal upon the completion of probation, constitutes a prior conviction under the three strikes law.

We hold that the full…

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.