Riggs

Riggs v. Fairman

Good Law
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 7, 200502-55185California8,457 words

Opinion

Opinion

I.

BACKGROUND

Riggs was charged with petty theft in the Superior Court of RIGGS v. FAIRMAN 2795 California. He had been convicted previously of four counts of robbery. Although Riggs’ four robbery convictions arose from a single proceeding, each conviction constituted a sepa- rate “strike” under California’s three strikes law.1 See People v. Campos, 45 Cal.Rptr.2d 706, 709 (Cal.App. 1995). Califor- nia’s three strikes law imposes a 25-year-to-life sentence on defendants previously convicted of two or more “serious” or “violent” felonies. Cal. Penal Code §§ 667(e)(2)(A), 1170.12(c)(2)(A).

Before his preliminary hearing, Riggs, the deputy district attorney, and Riggs’ defense counsel engaged in plea negotia- tions. None of the parties to the negotiations understood that Riggs faced a potential life prison term under California’s three strikes law. The prosecutor was unaware that she could charge four “strikes” for four robbery charges tried in a single proceeding. Riggs’ counsel had limited knowledge of Riggs’ criminal history due to her failure to independently investigate Riggs’ prior criminal record. Based on her limited knowledge, Riggs’ counsel…

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.