What is the test for a recidivist offender to succeed on his equal protection claim?

To succeed on his equal protection claim, defendant " 'first must show that the state has adopted a classification that affects two or more similarly situated groups in an unequal manner.' [Citations.]" (People v. Wilkinson (2004) 33 Cal.4th 821, 836.) Respondent argues defendant has failed to show that a recidivist offender previously convicted of a serious or violent felony is similarly situated to a first-time juvenile offender. Respondent argues that assuming the two groups are similarly situated, the correct test on review is not strict scrutiny, but the rational basis test because the statutory disparity does not implicate a suspect class or fundamental right.

We assume for the purpose of our review that the two groups are similarly situated. We agree with respondent that strict scrutiny (which requires a showing that the classification is closely related to a compelling state interest, is necessary to achieve the state's goal, and is narrowly drawn to achieve that goal by the least restrictive means possible) is not the standard to be applied. (People v. Cole (2007) 152 Cal.App.4th 230, 238.) There is no suspect class here that would require strict scrutiny. People v. Olivas

Page 31