How has the court determined that defendant remained an unreasonable risk to public safety while on probation and on parole?

The court also noted that defendant's disciplinary history while incarcerated was not serious, and included failing to comply with the directives of a correctional deputy and possession of drug paraphernalia. The court balanced this relatively calm period in defendant's life, his age and his health problems, against the risk he had posed to so many others while evading police during the commitment offense, and his long and consistent history of violence and poor performance on probation and parole. In reviewing this record, we cannot say that the trial court's determination that defendant remained an unreasonable risk to public safety was an arbitrary, whimsical, or capricious conclusion. (See, e.g., People v. Nocelotl (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 1091, 1097.)

Page 13

C. Application of Proposition 47