People v. Morales CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 4, 2015C078663California998 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

Defendant contends the trial court’s decision to deny his resentencing petition was erroneous, and asks us to remand with directions to grant his petition. We agree with the first contention but disagree with the second.

Section 1170.18, subdivision (a) provides: “A person currently serving a sentence for a conviction, whether by trial or plea, of a felony or felonies who would have been guilty of a misdemeanor under the act that added this section (‘this act’) 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 . . . .” (Italics added.)

Section 1170.18 was enacted as part of Proposition 47, which reduced many crimes from felony to misdemeanor. As pertinent to this case, Proposition 47 added section 459.5, which establishes the offense of shoplifting, a misdemeanor, which applies to any theft from a commercial establishment “where the value of the property that is taken or intended to be taken does not exceed nine hundred fifty dollars ($950).” (§ 459.5, subd. (a); People v. Rivera (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1085, 1091.) This…

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.