People v. Floyd CA3

DISCUSSION

Defendant argues the trial court abused its discretion when it denied his motion to strike his prior strike pursuant to his Romero motion. He argues that imposition of the strike enhancement was “overkill.” Defendant’s prior strike was a first degree burglary conviction from San Francisco County. The San Francisco Superior Court indicated the original docket could not be located, so little is known of the underlying facts. Defendant received probation for the

The jury found defendant not guilty of a second count of first degree residential burglary and one count of harassment. The factual background does not focus on these allegations.

3 burglary. Defendant’s California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) printout, or certified rap sheet, showed arrests and detentions beginning in 1996, when defendant was a juvenile. Over 60 incidents were listed. Failure to 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.) “‘The burden is on the party attacking the sentence to clearly show that the sentencing decision was irrational or arbitrary. [Citation.]…