People v. May CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 20, 2015C077587California598 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

The underlying facts of defendant’s crimes are irrelevant to the issue on appeal. It suffices to say that defendant was convicted of felony drug possession for conduct that cannot now be charged as felonious. Proposition 47 requires “misdemeanors instead of felonies for nonserious, nonviolent crimes . . . unless the defendant has prior convictions for specified violent or serious crimes.” (Ballot Pamp., Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014) text of Prop. 47, p. 70. § 3.) It also added section 1170.18, subdivision (a) which provides that a person who is “currently serving a sentence for a conviction . . . of a felony or felonies who would have been guilty of a misdemeanor under the act that added this section . . . had this act been in effect at the time of the offense may petition for a recall of sentence before the trial court that entered the judgment of conviction in his or her case to request resentencing . . . .” Defendant correctly notes possession of a controlled substance is now a misdemeanor and he apparently does not have a disqualifying prior conviction. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a).) He argues that pursuant to In re Estrada (1965) 63 Cal.2d 740, the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.