Does a mid term sentence need to be imposed on a convicted drug dealer who was convicted of a series of drug crimes because of premeditation?

In addition to finding premeditation, the court also found, in aggravation, that there was a large quantity of contraband and that defendant was on bail when one of the offenses was committed. The court stated it found these factors preponderated. Defendant argues that since the factors in mitigation, i.e., defendant's level of participation, defendant's minimal prior record, and defendant's acknowledgment of wrongdoing at an early stage, are equal in number to the factors in aggravation, the mid term should have been imposed. However, the weighing process is not quantitative only. One aggravating factor can outweigh several mitigating circumstances. (Cf. People v. Burg (1981) 120 Cal.App.3d 304, 306, 174 Cal.Rptr. 491.) [230 Cal.App.3d 1638] Defendant has not demonstrated the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing him.