California Legal Brief

The Rule of People v. Bradley is that the One Strike law permits only a single sentence per count based on qualifying circumstances, and the Habitual Sexual Offender law and One Strike law are alternative sentencing schemes requiring the trial court to choose only one, under circumstances where a defendant is convicted of qualifying sex offenses with multiple proven One Strike circumstances and prior convictions.

Appeal from judgment after jury trial in Superior Court, San Diego County.

Defendant Appellant was Jazz Bradley — the defendant convicted of forcible rape of two victims and unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor who was sentenced under multiple sentencing schemes.

Plaintiff Respondent was The People — the prosecuting party seeking affirmance of Bradley's convictions and sentences.

The suit sounded in criminal prosecution for forcible rape, kidnapping for rape, robbery, assault, and unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor. [No cross-claims applicable.]

The key substantive facts leading to the suit were Bradley forcibly raped two victims on separate occasions (one 16 years old), kidnapped both victims, committed robbery, and engaged in unlawful sexual intercourse with another 16-year-old minor, all while on parole for a prior forcible rape conviction and wearing an ankle monitoring bracelet.

The procedural result leading to the Appeal: The trial court sentenced Bradley to LWOP on count 5, 50 years to life on count 1, plus determinate terms, but also imposed and stayed additional sentences under both the Habitual Sexual Offender law and unused One Strike circumstances, ruling that multiple alternative sentences could be imposed but stayed as a safeguard.

The key question(s) on Appeal: 1. Whether the trial court violated the prohibition against dual use of facts in imposing the upper term for robbery 2. Whether additional stayed sentences under the Habitual Sexual Offender law are authorized when defendant is already sentenced under the One Strike law 3. Whether additional stayed sentences based on unused One Strike circumstances are authorized

The Appellate Court held the One Strike law permits only a single sentence per count regardless of multiple proven circumstances, and the One Strike and Habitual Sexual Offender laws are alternative sentencing schemes requiring selection of only one scheme per count, not both even if stayed.

The case is inapplicable when a defendant has not been convicted of qualifying sex offenses under both the One Strike law and Habitual Sexual Offender law, or when only the minimum required One Strike circumstances have been proven rather than multiple circumstances.

The case leaves open whether trial courts have authority under section 1385(c) to strike One Strike circumstances under subdivision (l) of section 667.61, and the scope of appellate authority to vacate or dismiss jury findings on alternative sentencing schemes.