P. v. Banks
Defendant William Adam Banks appeals from a judgment sentencing him to six years in prison. His sole claim is that the upper term sentence the trial court imposed on count 1 violated his constitutional rights because it relied on aggravating factors that were not proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. In an opinion issued April 13, 2007, we held the courts reliance on defendants prior convictions and his unsatisfactory performance on probation and parole could support its choice of the upper term, but reversed the sentence and remanded the matter for a new sentencing hearing on whether, in the exercise of its discretion, the trial court believed this factor alone supported imposing an upper term. The California Supreme Court granted a petition for review and subsequently transferred the matter back to us with directions to vacate our original decision and reconsider the case in light of its recent decisions in People v. Black (2007) 41 Cal.4th 799 (Black II) and People v. Sandoval (2007) 41 Cal.4th 825. We issued an order vacating our original decision and granted the parties additional time to file supplemental briefs. Having received and considered the supplemental briefs, Court now affirm the judgment.
Comments on P. v. Banks