[Jonty30]

Was he convicted of assaulting this minor?

If not, than regardless of it, it shouldn’t have been a factor in his sentencing.

[Hugin]

He was convicted of strong arm robbery, and the deciding factor was his long history of violent felonies. That was the whole idea of 3 strikes.

[Hugin]

Just to clarify, strong arm robbery assumes assault and theft. Just as armed robbery assumes assault with a deadly weapon. Assault doesn’t have to be actual violence, it can be the threat of violence. They don’t charge you with assault and theft separately. Yet the liberals never tell you it was a violent crime against a minor. A 10 year old kid, IIRC.

Good riddance.

I do agree in principle that the third strike should be serious, but in this case it was. And if career criminals don’t like the law, they can move to some other state.

[Cyber Liberty]

Was he convicted of assaulting this minor?

If not, than regardless of it, it shouldn’t have been a factor in his sentencing.

---

In fact, Felony Assault was the crime for which he was convicted and took the one-way trip down the river. The slice of pizza bit is media embellishment meant to con people into thinking the guy got a life term for stealing a slice of pizza. No, he got the life sentence for beating up a little kid to get the pizza. I see it worked like a charm on you.