California Court of Appeal

Reset A A Font size: Print

People v. Superior Court (Kaulick), B246632

The trial court should not have granted defendant's petition for resentencing under the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (the Act), without insuring that the District Attorney had received notice and an opportunity to be heard on the issue of dangerousness, where: 1) the prosecution has the right to notice and an opportunity to be heard; 2) both the defendant and the victim have the right to be heard at any hearing on a petition for resentencing under the Act; 3) the resentencing should take place before the original sentencing judge, if available, although this is waivable; 4) as to the issue of burden of proof of the issue of dangerousness, the prosecution must establish such dangerousness by a preponderance of the evidence; and 5) defendant's equal protection challenge is without merit.

Appellate Information

  • Decided 04/30/2013
  • Published 04/30/2013

Judges

  • CROSKEY

Court

  • California Court of Appeal

Counsel