People v. Cokley CA3

DISCUSSION

We find no error. A trial court’s “failure to dismiss or strike a prior conviction allegation is subject to review under the deferential abuse of discretion standard.” (People v. Carmony (2004) 33 Cal.4th 367, 374 (Carmony).) We will not reverse for abuse of discretion unless defendant shows the decision was “so irrational or arbitrary that no reasonable person could agree with it.” (Id. at p. 377.) In ruling on a Romero motion, the trial court “must consider whether, in light of the nature and circumstances of his present felonies and prior serious and/or violent felony convictions, and the particulars of his background, character, and prospects, the defendant may be deemed outside the scheme’s spirit, in whole or in part, and hence should be treated as though he had not previously been convicted of one or more serious and/or violent felonies.” (People v. Williams (1998) 17 Cal.4th 148, 161.) Reversal is justified where the trial court was unaware of its discretion to strike a prior strike, or refused to do so at least in part for impermissible reasons. (Carmony, supra, 33 Cal.4th at p. 378.) But where the trial court, aware of its discretion, “ ’balanced the relevant…