What is the test for a reversal of a sentence for a convicted criminal convicted of a prior serious or violent crime?

Where the record reflects that the trial court has not exercised informed discretion during sentencing, remand is appropriate. (People v. Belmontes, supra, 34 Cal.3d at p. 348 & fn. 8.) The trial court's statements demonstrate the court believed it lacked discretion and must sentence Coca pursuant to three strikes law as to count four. The court stated if it had "true discretion" it would exercise it, but it found "it doesn't have discretion as to that count." This was error under Romero.

Respondent argues reversal is not mandated because the record demonstrates it would have been an abuse of discretion to dismiss the prior strike. "Whether the trial court believed it had discretion to strike the alleged prior felony convictions or not, appellant has suffered no prejudice since it would have been a manifest abuse of that discretion to exercise it on this record." (People v. DeGuzman (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 1049, 1055.) "[R]emand to the trial court would constitute an idle act in that any order striking a prior serious or violent felony conviction would constitute an abuse of the trial court's discretion." (People v. Askey (1996) 49 Cal.App.4th 381, 389.)