The United States Supreme Court recently refused to hear an appeal from a California Supreme Court decision holding that juvenile cases can be used as “strikes” under California’s “Three Strikes” sentencing law.

Under California’s Three Strikes law, the sentence for any felony may be doubled if an individual has previously been convicted of a serious or violent felony, and thus has two strikes.  A defendant faces a minimum sentence of 25 years-to-life if he has two such priors, making the new conviction a third strike.

A defendant in this new case was convicted of felony possession of a firearm by an ex-felon, amongst other offenses.  The trial court doubled his sentence due to a juvenile adjudication for assault with a deadly weapon when he was 16 years old.  The defendant argued that use of his juvenile adjudication as a strike violated his constitutional right to have a jury determine any fact considered in increasing his sentence, because there are no jury trials in juvenile court.  The Cal Supremes held that, though there is no right to a jury trial in juvenile court, a court may increase punishment based on the defendant’s prior history whether as an adult or, as in this case, even as a juvenile.

It is more important than ever to make sure that all future consequences of all court cases, including juvenile matters, are fully considered.

People v. Nguyen (2009) 46 Cal.4th 1007, cert. denied by Nguyen v. California (2010) --S.Ct.--, 2010 WL 1525798.