What is the burden of proving that section 667 of the California Criminal Code is constitutional?

There is a presumption that legislation is constitutional, and the party who attacks a classification as unconstitutional bears the burden of [206 Cal.App.3d 602] demonstrating its arbitrariness. (Board of Education v. Watson (1966) 63 Cal.2d 829, 833, 48 Cal.Rptr. 481, 409 P.2d 481.) A person who claims a denial of equal protection must

Page 675

People v. Jacobs (1984) 157 Cal.App.3d 797, 204 Cal.Rptr. 234 is illustrative. Defendant in Jacobs argued that section 667 denied him equal protection because its five-year enhancement is inapplicable to defendants who are not recidivists or who are charged with crimes not enumerated in that section. The court rejected that argument, reasoning that the defendant was not similarly situated with first-time offenders or with persons convicted of other crimes. Instead, defendant was in a special class of persons, i.e., those convicted of a serious felony who had previously been convicted of a serious felony. As all such recidivist serious offenders were subject to the five-year enhancement, there was no equal protection violation. (Id., at pp. 802-805, 204 Cal.Rptr. 234.)