Court Opinion

ID: 9626270
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 08:06:50.792649+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:06:24.618690
License: Public Domain

LUCAS, J.
I concur in the judgment affirming defendant’s conviction.
I have some reservations regarding the holding in People v. Crowson (1983) 33 Cal.3d 623, 632-635 [190 Cal.Rptr. 165, 660 P.2d 389], that the People may not “go behind” the elements of a prior offense to prove certain *840specifics of the defendant’s conduct which have become relevant for enhancement purposes by reason of his commission of a new offense. I did not participate in Crowson, and I feel that we should reconsider that aspect of the case.
The present case, however, is not a suitable vehicle for reconsidering Crowson, because defendant expressly admitted the residential nature of his burglaries and, as the majority holds, that admission is sufficient for purposes of enhancing his sentence. Accordingly, I concur in the judgment.
Appellant’s petition for a rehearing was denied March 21, 1985.