P. v. Perrone CA4/3
Robert Wayne Perrone appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition to recall under Proposition 36 his Three Strikes 25-years-to-life sentence imposed in 1997 and to resentence him to time served. Perrone argues the unambiguous statutory definition of “unreasonable risk of danger to public safety” as “used throughout this code” (Pen. Code, § 1170.18, subd. (c); all further statutory references are to this code) limited the trial court’s discretion to deny recall and resentencing unless he posed a risk of committing certain enumerated serious or violent felonies (see ibid.), colloquially known as “super strike” offenses. He contends that applying a broader standard for the risk of dangerousness, i.e., one in which the court could find Perrone posed an unreasonable risk of danger even if it was unlikely he posed the precise danger of committing a super strike offense, violates equal protection principles and the electorate’s command at the ballot box. Specifi
Comments on P. v. Perrone CA4/3