People v. Alexander CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 10, 2021E077318California728 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

In 2004, defendant and appellant Steven Eugene Alexander was charged by a

single-count information with possession of a stolen vehicle pursuant to Penal Code1

section 496d, subdivision (a). The information also alleged that he had served one prior

prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) and had one prior strike conviction (§§ 1170.12,

subds. (a)-(d), 667, subds. (b)-(i)). Defendant entered a plea agreement and pled guilty in

exchange for a two-year term in state prison and the dismissal of the other allegations. In

2017, he filed a resentencing petition under section 1170.18 (Prop. 47, as approved by

voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014).) The People filed an opposition asserting defendant

had to prove the stolen vehicle was worth less than $950. A trial court held a hearing and

found defendant was not eligible for resentencing and denied the petition without

prejudice.

On February 17, 2021, defendant filed a motion to correct/modify and/or remand

the sentence. The motion was denied by written order finding that, in his plea agreement,

defendant agreed to pay actual restitution, there was a victim restitution hearing where

the court heard argument by the…

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.