P. v. Winston
A jury convicted Mark A. Winston of transportation of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, 11379, subd. (a)), possession for sale of a controlled substance (id., 11378) and misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance (id., 11357, subd. (b)). After receiving the jury's verdict, the trial court made findings that Winston had four prison priors and three prior strike convictions. (Pen. Code, 667.5, subd. (b), 667, 1170.12.) As a third strike offender, Winston was sentenced to 28 years to life in prison.
Winston appeals both his convictions and his sentence on numerous grounds. He contends: (i) the trial court erroneously denied his motion to suppress evidence; (ii) the trial court erred by failing to conduct an in camera review of police personnel files pursuant to his motion for discovery under Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531 (Pitchess); (iii) there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict that he transported methamphetamine; (iv) the trial court erroneously instructed the jury in response to an inquiry regarding the lawfulness of the police search of his vehicle; (v) the trial court abused its discretion under People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497 in declining to strike any of his prior strikes; (vi) his sentence is unconstitutional under both California and federal law because it is cruel and unusual; (vii) his sentence is unconstitutional as a violation of double jeopardy principles; and (viii) the trial court erroneously relied at sentencing on a prior strike alleged to have been the result of an unconstitutional conviction.
Court's review of Winston's contentions reveals that only the last contention is meritorious. Accordingly Court affirm the convictions, but remand for resentencing in light of the trial court's failure to hold an evidentiary hearing regarding one of Winston's prior strikes as required under People v. Sumstine (1984) 36 Cal.3d 909 (Sumstine).
Comments on P. v. Winston