Error and/or relief
Imposition of the upper term based on judge-found facts, without the defendant’s express waiver of his jury trial right, violated the Sixth Amendment and California law, and the error was not harmless. Accordingly, we reverse.
First Holding:
The court found true the rule 4.421(b)(2) aggravating factor regarding numerous or increasingly serious prior convictions or adjudications, explaining only that the defendant has not only the prior strike, he has a substantial amount of convictions on his RAP sheet.
The trial court may impose an upper term sentence only when there are circumstances in aggravation of the crime that justify the imposition of a term of imprisonment exceeding the middle term and the facts underlying those circumstances have been stipulated to by the defendant or have been found true beyond a reasonable doubt at trial by the jury or by the judge in a court trial.
The record does not reflect that the defendant ever waived his right to a jury trial on the aggravating factors.
Authority:
PEN 1170(b)(2)
Second Holding:
The right to a jury trial on all aggravating facts, other than a prior conviction, relied upon to justify an upper term sentence is not merely a state law entitlement, but is constitutionally required by the Sixth Amendment. Any waiver of this right must be express. Absent waiver or stipulation, a jury must determine whether the particular details of a defendant’s criminal history demonstrate convictions of increasing seriousness, before a trial court can rely on that fact to justify an upper term sentence.
Authority:
Rules of Court rule 4.421(b)(2)
People v. Wiley (2025) 17 Cal.5th 1069, 1078, 1082-1084
People v. Lynch (2024) 16 Cal.5th 730, 768
People v. French (2008) 43 Cal.4th 36, 47–48
Third Holding:
When such an error occurs, we determine whether it was prejudicial under the Chapman standard of review, under which we must reverse and remand unless we conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that a jury, applying that same standard, would have found the aggravating factor true.
Authority:
Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18