Opinion ID: 2600795
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The One Strike law

Text: Approximately six months after the Legislature enacted the Three Strikes law as urgency legislation, it adopted section 667.61, the One Strike law. ( People v. Rayford (1994) 9 Cal.4th 1, 8, 36 Cal. Rptr.2d 317, 884 P.2d 1369; People v. Ervin (1996) 50 Cal.App.4th 259, 264, 57 Cal. Rptr.2d 728.) This section sets forth an alternative and harsher sentencing scheme for certain enumerated sex crimes perpetrated by force, [3] including rape, foreign object penetration, sodomy, and oral copulation. [4] The section applies if the defendant has previously been convicted of one of seven specified offenses, or if the current offense was committed under one or more specified circumstances. Subdivision (a) provides that if defendant has previously been convicted of an offense enumerated in subdivision (c), or if two of the circumstances specified in subdivision (e) apply to th e current offenses, an indeterminate term of 25 years to life shall be imposed. Subdivision (b) provides that if one of the circumstances specified in subdivision (e) applies, an indeterminate term of 15 years to life shall be imposed. Subdivision (i) requires the facts of any specified circumstance to be pled and proved to the trier of fact or admitted by the defendant in open court. Subdivision (f) provides that if only the minimum number of qualifying circumstances required for One Strike sentencing treatment have been pled and proved, they must be used as the basis for imposing the One Strike term rather than to impose lesser enhancements or punishment under any other law. (§ 667.61.)