The Court of Appeal reversed the order denying appellant’s motions under Penal Code sections 17, subdivision (b) and 1203.4, finding that it could not conclude based on the record that the trial court exercised its discretion impartially and with full consideration of the relevant circumstances. Specifically, the court noted that, when presented with motions to reduce and dismiss convictions, courts should consider the nature and circumstances of the offense, the defendant’s attitude toward the offense, character traits evidenced by the defendant’s behavior and demeanor, the defendant’s performance on probation, and the defendant’s post-probation conduct. But, here, the court’s consideration of appellant’s motions appeared to have been overwhelmingly influenced by its view of the vile and racist language appellant used during the offenses and in two incidents a few weeks prior to the offenses, and inferences drawn from that use of language about appellant’s character 10 years later.