P. v. Macias CA2/7
Edward Macias petitioned for recall of sentence under Proposition 36, the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Pen. Code, § 1170.126). The superior court denied the petition, finding Macias was ineligible for relief because his current sentence had been imposed for an offense committed with the intent to cause great bodily injury to another person. On appeal Macias contends the court erred in applying a preponderance-of-the-evidence, rather than the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt, standard of proof. The People concede the court erred in using a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard but argue the error was harmless because it is not reasonably probable that the court, employing the proper standard of proof, would not have ruled that Macias intended to cause great bodily injury when committing the underlying crime. We reverse and remand for a new eligibility hearing utilizing the proper standard of proof.
Comments on P. v. Macias CA2/7