Wade

People v. Wade

Bad Law
139 Cal. Rptr. 3d 529·2012 Cal. App. LEXIS 398·204 Cal. App. 4th 1142
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 9, 2012No. A126393California3,979 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Simons, J.

—Defendant Clenard Cebron Wade appeals following his conviction by a jury of grand theft, battery causing serious bodily injury, criminal threats, assault by force likely to produce great bodily injury, and false imprisonment. He contends the trial court erred in denying his pretrial motion to represent himself, his convictions for battery causing serious bodily injury and grand theft are unlawful, and the court improperly denied him presentence conduct credits. In the published portion of this opinion, we address two issues. First, we reject defendant’s argument that Penal Code section 243, subdivision (f)(5) 1 helps define the phrase “serious bodily injury” in section 243, subdivision (d); that phrase is defined solely by section 243, subdivision (f)(4). Second, we agree with defendant’s contention that a recent amendment to the definition of grand theft should be applied retroactively, reducing his conviction of that offense to petty theft. We remand for resentencing, including recalculation of defendant’s presentence conduct credits.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In March 2008, the Contra Costa County District Attorney filed an information charging defendant with robbery…

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.