How have courts dealt with a defendant's history of mental illness and criminal history?

Here, the court took defendant's history of mental illness into consideration, along with his criminal history, in reaching its conclusion that defendant remains extraordinarily violent despite the opportunity for treatment. Where a court has taken the defendant's background, the nature of his present offenses, and other individualized considerations into account (Romero, supra, 13 Cal.4th at pp. 530-531), we cannot say that it abused its discretion unless its conclusion was irrational or arbitrary. (People v. Carmony, supra, 33 Cal.4th at p. 377.) The court did consider the appropriate factors, and its conclusion was neither irrational nor arbitrary. Accordingly, it acted within its discretion in denying defendant's Romero motion.

Page 20

The judgment is affirmed.