California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Rumph, C080174 (Cal. App. 2017):
Appellate courts review a trial court's "failure to dismiss or strike a prior [felony] conviction allegation . . . under the deferential abuse of discretion standard." (People v. Carmony (2004) 33 Cal.4th 367, 374.) In reviewing for abuse of discretion, we are "guided by two fundamental precepts. First, ' "[t]he burden is on the party attacking the sentence to clearly show that the sentencing decision was irrational or arbitrary. [Citation.] In the absence of such a showing, the trial court is presumed to have acted to achieve legitimate sentencing objectives, and its discretionary determination to impose a particular sentence will not be set aside on review." ' [Citations.] Second, a ' "decision will not be reversed merely because reasonable people might disagree. 'An appellate tribunal is neither authorized nor warranted in substituting its judgment for the judgment of the trial judge.' " ' [Citations.] Taken together, these precepts establish that a trial
Page 8
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.