Nichols

People v. Nichols

Good Law
198 Cal. Rptr. 3d 227·2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 80·244 Cal. App. 4th 681
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 3, 2016H041979California3,120 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bamattremanoukian, J.

*685 I. INTRODUCTION

In August 2012 defendant Daniel Lawrence Nichols pleaded no contest to the felony offense of buying or receiving a stolen motor vehicle with a prior conviction for vehicle theft (Pen.Code, §§ 496d, 666.5 ), 1 and admitted the allegation that he had one prior violent or serious felony conviction that also qualified as a strike within the meaning of the Three Strikes law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12). The trial court imposed a term of four years in the state prison.

In November 2014 defendant filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which the trial court treated as a petition for resentencing under section 1170.18, subdivision (a). Section 1170.18 was enacted by Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (the Act). (Prop. 47, as approved by voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014), effective Nov. 5, 2014.) The trial court denied the petition on the ground that section 1170.18 does not apply to a felony conviction for buying or receiving a stolen motor vehicle in violation of *229 section 496d and therefore resentencing defendant as a misdemeanant was not authorized by Proposition 47.

On appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred…

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.