People v. Mercadel CA4/3

INTRODUCTION

Defendant Jimmie Lee Mercadel appeals from the sentence imposed after he was convicted of second-degree burglary for an abortive attempt to shoplift $2,300 in merchandise from an Irvine Wal-Mart. He asserts he should have been given either straight probation or a prison term lower than the maximum he received. He also asserts that a condition of his mandatory supervision after incarceration was unconstitutional. We affirm the sentence imposed and the trial court’s decision to deny probation. Although only 25 years old when he was convicted, Mercadel already had a 12-year history of committing ever more serious offenses while repeatedly violating the terms of his various probations. In fact, he was on probation from a prior theft when he committed this crime. The trial court was well within its discretion when it denied probation and imposed the maximum sentence, hoping to encourage Mercadel to consider the likely outcome of his present course before he did something that could put him away for a large portion of his life. We reverse the condition of mandatory supervision, however. The condition is not “narrowly tailored,” that is, it is not reasonably related to…