P. v. Clarke
Karyl Onell Clarke (defendant) appeals from the judgment entered following a jury trial resulting in his conviction of making a criminal threat (Pen. Code, 422; count 3),[1]with a court finding that defendant had a juvenile adjudication of a prior serious felony of robbery that qualified him for sentencing pursuant to the three strikes law ( 667, subds. (b)-(i); 1170.12). The trial court sentenced him to a six-year term in state prison. He contends that (1) his conviction must be reversed because [the trial court] violate[d] his rights to a unanimous verdict, fair notice, and proof beyond a reasonable doubt; (2) the trial evidence is insufficient to support his conviction of making a criminal threat; (3) the imposition of an upper term at sentencing constitutes Cunningham error (Cunningham v. California (2007) 562 U.S. ___ [127 S.Ct. 856]); (4) the trial court improperly considered his prior commitment to the California Youth Authority in determining that he had served a prior prison term within the meaning of California Rules of Court, rule 4.421(B)(3); and (5) the trial court erred by finding that his prior juvenile adjudication of robbery constituted a strike within the meaning of the three strikes law. Court conclude that the trial court erred by failing to charge the jury with a unanimity instruction, and the error is prejudicial. Accordingly, Court order the judgment reversed.
Comments on P. v. Clarke