People v. Marabut CA2/4

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 31, 2016B265827California1,583 words

Opinion

Opinion

DISCUSSION

I Statutory interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo. (People v. Prunty (2015) 62 Cal.4th 59, 71.) We apply the same rules of construction to statutes and voter initiatives. (People v. Park (2013) 56 Cal.4th 782, 796; People v. Briceno (2004) 34 Cal.4th 451, 459.) Although we begin with the statutory language, we do not construe it in isolation; rather, every statute must be read in context “‘“with reference to the entire scheme of law of which it is part so that the whole may be harmonized and retain effectiveness.” [Citation.]’ [Citation.]” (Horwich v. Superior Court (1999) 21 Cal.4th 272, 276; People v. Brown (2014) 230 Cal.App.4th 1502, 1509.) Section 1170.18, subdivision (k), provides: “Any felony conviction that is recalled and resentenced under subdivision (b) or designated as a misdemeanor under subdivision (g) shall be considered a misdemeanor for all purposes, except that such resentencing shall not permit that person to own, possess, or have in his or her custody or

3 Appellant was granted a certificate of probable cause to appeal the denial of the section 995 motion. Because the section 30305 offense was originally charged as a felony, we…

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.