Robert R. Snyder v. California

• Should California Penal Code § 12022.53 be struck down and voided as vague and standardless legislation? Does petitioner’s conviction serve as an example of an arbitrary enforcement? • Did California Supreme Court fail to incorp­ orate Rosemonds substantive holding into their jurisprudence? • Does the act as currently interpreted, deprive defendants of accurate fact-finding regarding the principle of armed-intent? • Was § 12022.53 subd.(e) originally intended to be a penalty provision or limitation clause? • In this case, would a 25 years-to-life con­ secutive enhancement for a first-time felon/youth offender seem to violate the Eight Amendment to the U. S. Constitution? • With the harsh penalty alongside the lack of sentencing triad in mind, shouldn’t that indicate § 12022.53’s application be limited to the most extreme case facts and circumstances? • Would the simple fact of several legislative amendments, by itself raise questions about how the act’s original intent compares to its current usage?