Hammer

People v. Hammer

Good Law
134 Cal. Rptr. 2d 590·2003 Cal. LEXIS 3490·2003 Daily Journal DAR 5689·30 Cal. 4th 756·69 P.3d 436
Supreme Court of CaliforniaMay 29, 2003S104303California6,105 words

Opinion

Opinion

George, J.

Penal Code section 667.61, known as the “One Strike” law, requires imposition of a sentence of 25 years to life in prison if a person is convicted of one of the sexual offenses listed in subdivision (c) of the statute and certain other triggering circumstances are found to exist. (Pen. Code, § 667.61, subds. (a), (c), (d) & (e).) One of the triggering circumstances is that the person previously has been convicted “of an offense specified in subdivision (c).” {Id., subd. (d)(1).) The list of offenses set forth in subdivision (c) includes the following: “(7) A violation of subdivision (a) of Section 288, unless the defendant qualifies for probation under subdivision (c) of Section 1203.066.” In this case, defendant previously was convicted in 1988 of a violation of section 288, subdivision (a), but in that prior proceeding defendant qualified for, and was granted, probation. More than 10 years later, defendant was convicted in the present proceeding of new specified offenses under the One Strike law, including new violations of section 288, subdivision (a). The question presented is whether the prior conviction of the earlier section 288, subdivision (a) charge, as to which…

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.