People v. Stout CA3

DISCUSSION

Defendant contends he is entitled to resentencing on the prior prison term enhancement based on the possession of a controlled substance because that possession conviction was designated a misdemeanor by the Shasta County Superior Court pursuant to Proposition 47.3 We disagree. Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (the Act) that was enacted three days before the second sentencing hearing, requires “misdemeanors instead of felonies for nonserious, nonviolent crimes . . . unless the defendant has prior convictions for specified violent or serious crimes.” (Voter Information Guide, Gen.

We dispense with the facts of defendant’s crimes as they are unnecessary to resolve this appeal. This issue is currently before the California Supreme Court. (See, e.g., People v. Valenzuela (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 692, review granted March 30, 2016, S232900; People v. Carrea (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 966, review granted April 27, 2016, S233011.)

2 Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014) text of Prop. 47, § 3, subds. (3), (4) & (5) p. 70.) Among the affected crimes are the possession of a controlled substance offenses that are now misdemeanors barring certain exceptions not…