People v. Price CA2/5

DISCUSSION

Defendant presents two contentions on appeal: (1) the trial court erred when it ruled that defendant had the burden of proving that he was eligible for resentencing under Proposition 47; and (2) the court committed error by considering police reports, which are not part of the record of conviction, in determining that defendant was ineligible for relief. We hold the trial court correctly placed the burden on defendant of proving that he committed what now amounts to misdemeanor shoplifting, that defendant failed to sustain that burden, and his petition for relief under Proposition 47 was properly denied. Because the appeal is fully resolved by rejection of defendant’s first contention, there is no need to address his second point. People v. Sherow (2015) 239 Cal.App.4th 875, 879-880 (Sherow), held that a defendant convicted of second degree burglary, who seeks resentencing pursuant to Proposition 47 under the shoplifting statute, bears the burden of establishing entitlement to relief. We agree with the reasoning in Sherow, which is entirely consistent with the approach of the trial court in this case. “Proposition 47, which is codified in section 1170.18, reduced the…