Legal Opinion

People v. Flores

California Court of Appeal

Decided July 8, 2014No. B250829PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

YEGAN, J.

There are limits to the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (The Reform Act). Relief may be denied in the discretion of the sentencing court upon a finding that a reduced sentence would “pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.” (Pen. Code, § 1170.126, subd. (f).)

Mark Anthony Flores asked the trial court to reduce his third strike 25-year-to-life sentence and resentence him as a second strike offender. The trial court denied relief impliedly finding that he was outside the “spirit” of The Reform Act. Appellant mounts a facial challenge to the law. He contends that…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. People v. Superior Court (Romero)California Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Go-Bart Importing Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  3. Cameron v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  4. People v. WilliamsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1998
  5. People v. AndersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2001

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. People v. ValenciaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  2. People v. FriersonCalifornia Supreme Court · 2017
  3. People v. Rivas-ColonCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2015
  4. People v. HallCalifornia Court of Appeal · 2016
  5. People v. J.W.California Court of Appeal · 2015

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API