P. v. Woods CA2/4
Appellant Wayne E. Woods appeals from the denial of his petition for resentencing under Proposition 36 (the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012), codified in Penal Code section 1170.126. The trial court concluded that he was ineligible for resentencing because in the commission of the subject crime (stalking), he intended to cause great bodily injury, thus making the crime a serious felony (§§ 667, subd. (e)(2)(C)(iii), 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)(C)(iii)), and also rendering him ineligible under section 1170.126, subdivision (e)(2). He contends that in making this finding, the court wrongly applied the preponderance-of-the-evidence standard rather than requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt. In light of the recent decision in People v. Frierson (2017) 4 Cal.5th 225 (Frierson), which held that proof beyond a reasonable doubt is required to make such a finding, we agree.
Comments on P. v. Woods CA2/4