What is the test for cruel or unusual punishment for a convicted rapist?

As appellant does not undertake a comparison of her sentence with sentences for other crimes in California or the same offense in other jurisdictions, we focus only on the nature of the offense and offender. (See People v. Szadziewicz (2008) 161 Cal.App.4th 823, 846.)

"To determine whether a sentence is cruel or unusual as applied to a particular defendant, a reviewing court must examine the circumstances of the offense, including its motive, the extent of the defendant's involvement in the crime, the manner in which the crime was committed, and the consequences of the defendant's acts. The court must also consider the personal characteristics of the defendant, including age, prior criminality, and mental capabilities. [Citation.]" (People v. Hines (1997) 15 Cal.4th 997, 1078.)

The nature of the offense is viewed both in the abstract and with a consideration of the totality of the circumstances surrounding its actual commission. The nature of the offender focuses on the person before the court. (People v. Martinez (1999) 76

Page 36

Cal.App.4th 489, 494.) "As under the federal standard, a defendant's history of recidivism, which is part of the nature of the offense and the offender, justifies harsh punishment. [Citations.]" (People v. Meeks, supra, 123 Cal.App.4th at p. 709.)