What is the standard for a motion to dismiss a criminal conviction for making criminal threats?

Our review of the record shows the trial court did not rely on the wrong standard in exercising its discretion or overlook the fact that defendant had not had any prior criminal conduct since the prior conviction. Both parties argued the correct standard to the court and prior counsel's declaration, as well as the probation report, mentioned that defendant had suffered no convictions since the 1997 conviction for making criminal threats. Finally, defense counsel's declaration averred she had verified that defendant's conviction had not been reduced to a misdemeanor; thus, there was nothing for the court to "completely overlook" in that regard. "Where the record demonstrates that the trial court balanced the relevant facts and reached an impartial decision in conformity with the spirit of the law, we shall affirm the trial court's ruling, even if we might have ruled differently in the first instance." (People v. Myers (1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 305, 310.) Reviewed deferentially, the trial court did not abuse it discretion by denying defendant's Romero motion.