(Super. Ct. No. 10F07088)
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Mauro , J.
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
A jury convicted defendant Carl Edward Young of being a felon in possession of a firearm. The trial court denied defendant's motion to dismiss his prior strike conviction and sentenced him to six years in prison.
Defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to dismiss his prior strike conviction. We conclude, however, that the trial court considered the relevant factors in finding that defendant fell within the spirit of the three strikes law, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's motion to dismiss the strike.
We will affirm the judgment.
Sacramento Police Officers James Gannon and Allen Perez saw defendant riding a bicycle on October 27, 2010. When Officer Gannon tried to engage defendant in conversation, defendant "took off" on the bicycle. The officers pursued defendant, first in their car, then on foot.
During the pursuit, Officers Gannon and Perez saw defendant throw the backpack he was carrying. After apprehending defendant, Officer Gannon asked defendant if there was a weapon inside the backpack, and defendant said there was. Officer Gannon found a .357 caliber handgun loaded with hollow point bullets inside the backpack.
Officer Perez read defendant his Miranda*fn1 rights. Defendant waived his rights and wanted to talk to the officers. Defendant told the officers he obtained the gun a couple of hours earlier from someone named "Chris." He said he needed the gun because of recent gang shootings in the area; his friend's car was recently "shot up." He also mentioned another gang-related shooting that recently occurred in a nearby area of Sacramento.
The jury convicted defendant of being a felon in possession of a firearm (Pen. Code, former § 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and defendant admitted that he had a prior conviction for assault with a firearm (Pen. Code, § 245, subd. (a)(2)), a serious felony (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (a), 1192.7, subd. (c)). Defendant made a Romero*fn2 motion to dismiss the prior strike ...