People v. Smith

Good Law
2016 Cal. App. LEXIS 412·202 Cal. Rptr. 3d 598·247 Cal. App. 4th 717·2016 WL 2994698
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 24, 2016E062858California4,551 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

SLOUGH J.

*719 Defendant Michael Lee Smith appeals from the summary denial of his Proposition 47 resentencing petition. (Pen.Code, § 1170.18.) Using Riverside County Superior Court's standard petitioning form, Smith sought to have two felony second degree commercial burglary (§ 459) 1 convictions (counts 1, 2) designated as misdemeanor shoplifting (§ 459.5) because "[t]he value of the check or property does not exceed $950.00." The People responded, also using the standard form, by checking the box *720 conceding Smith " is entitled to resentencing" and requesting a hearing to determine "[r]e-sentencing on Ct 2." The People did not contest the value of the loss in count 1, but did check the box requesting a hearing because the "People do not believe count one is eligible as [the victim] is not a commercial establishment," which is a required element of shoplifting under new section 459.5. The superior court agreed the victim in count 1 was not a commercial establishment and denied relief, and also summarily denied Smith's petition as to count 2 without explanation.

Smith argues the victim check exchange business is a commercial establishment and there is otherwise insufficient…

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.