How has the Attorney General argued that there are mitigating factors in the judgment of a defendant who failed to raise them in the trial?

as well as his other adult offenses." However, although the court did not specifically state these were mitigating factors (assuming arguendo that they were), the court did indicate that it had reviewed both probation reports which disclosed these matters, there is no indication that the court did not consider them, and "there is no requirement the court indicate its reasons for rejecting a mitigating factor." (People v. Reid (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 354, 371.)

The judgment is affirmed.

/s/_________
Pollak, Acting P.J.

We concur:

/s/_________
Siggins, J.

/s/_________
Jenkins, J.

Footnotes:

^1. In addition, the Attorney General is likely correct that these contentions were forfeited by the failure to raise them in the trial court. (See People v. McCullough (2013) 56 Cal.4th 589, 593.) Defendant's reply brief does not respond to this argument.