P. v. Etingoff
Defendant was convicted following a court trial of sexual offenses, and the trial court sentenced him pursuant to the one strike law (Pen. Code, § 667.61)[1] to 15 years to life for one of his convictions. Defendant argues that the sentence violates the ex post facto clauses of the United States and California Constitutions, because his offenses were committed before the effective date of the one strike law, and the Attorney General concedes that the trial court erred. We find the concession appropriate, vacate defendant's sentence, and remand the matter for resentencing under the law in effect prior to the effective date of the one strike law.
Comments on P. v. Etingoff