Mutter

People v. Mutter

Good Law
1 Cal. App. 5th 429·2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 563·204 Cal. Rptr. 3d 643
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 11, 2016E064355California2,620 words

Opinion

Opinion

Miller, J.

The trial court denied the Proposition 47 petition for resen-tencing of defendant and appellant James Carl Mutter. (Pen. Code, § 1170.18.) Defendant contends the trial court erred because the crime for which he sought resentencing—possession or receipt of counterfeit currency (§ 475, subd. (a))—is a misdemeanor after the passage of Proposition 47. The denial of the petition is reversed.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Defendant was charged with two offenses, both alleged to have occurred on or about November 30, 2013: (1) forgery, in that defendant willfully and unlawfully possessed or received a counterfeit item with the intent to pass the item, knowing it to be counterfeit (Pen. Code, § 475, subd. (a)) and (2) possession of heroin (Health & Saf. Code, § 1350, subd. (a)). The information did not identify the counterfeit item or its value. Two prison priors were also alleged against defendant. (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b).)

On January 16, 2015, defendant pled guilty to the forgery count (§ 475, subd. (a)). The trial court imposed a 16-month sentence, with four months to be served in the county jail and 12 months of mandatory supervision. At the plea hearing defendant…

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.