When will a court strike down the Three Strikes law?

On the day before trial, defendant made an oral motion asking the trial court to strike the Three Strikes law allegation pursuant to People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996) 13 Cal.4th 497. He argued that the charged crimes were a product of his alcoholism, and that he used alcohol as a means of "self-medicating" for his stomach cancer. The court denied the motion. The court explained that defendant did not "fall[] outside of the statutory scheme of the [Three Strikes law]," which was designed to address "revolving door criminal[s]," because defendant's criminal history dated back to 1985 and reflected "conviction after conviction and [probation] violation after [probation] violation." The court nevertheless denied the motion without prejudice, acknowledging that although "the facts of the instant case seem[] particularly egregious" due to defendant's high blood-alcohol content, the court would consider whether the facts adduced at trial painted a different picture.