 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
People v. Pier6/18/2002
indicated inter alia that he was "prone to violence"].)
With respect to punishments in California for more serious offenses, appellant observes that a third strike need not be a serious or violent felony; however, as the People note, that observation has nothing to do with his case. In any event, " ` ll recidivists with prior serious felonies are treated the same under the statutory scheme.' " (People v. Goodwin (1997) 59 Cal.App.4th 1084, 1094.)
As for punishments for comparable offenses in other jurisdictions, it is not enough to show, as appellant seeks to demonstrate, that the Three Strikes law is more severe than recidivist statutes in other states. (People v. Martinez, supra, 71 Cal.App.4th at p. 1516; see also People v. Mantanez, supra, 98 Cal.App.4th at pp. 364-365.) " ` he point at which a recidivist will be deemed to have demonstrated the necessary [criminal] propensities and the amount of time that the recidivist will be isolated from society are matters largely within the discretion of the punishing jurisdiction.' " (People v. Cooper (1996) 43 Cal.App.4th 815, 824.) Even if appellant's punishment is greater than he would have received in other states, it must further appear that his sentence is " ` " `out of all proportion to the offense.' " ' " (Martinez, supra, at p. 1516.)
We conclude that it is not. As stated in another opinion: "In light of [appellant's] current offense and extensive continued criminal conduct, we cannot say imposition of the [lengthy] sentence under the three strikes law either shocks the conscience or violates notions of human dignity. Rather, application of this law to [appellant] results from the need to deter offenders, like him, who repeatedly commit such crimes and to segregate them from the rest of society. This does not constitute cruel or unusual punishment." (People v. Ayon (1996) 46 Cal.App.4th 385, 400-401, disapproved on another point in People v. Deloza (1998) 18 Cal.4th 585, 600, fn. 10.)
III. DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
We concur:
Reardon, J.
Rivera, J.
Page 1 2 3 4 California DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|