Caretto

Caretto v. Superior Court of L. A. Cnty.

Good Law
239 Cal. Rptr. 3d 568·28 Cal. App. 5th 909
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 1, 2018B265256California4,989 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bigelow, J.

*911 Petitioner Paul Anthony Caretto challenges by petition for writ of mandate the trial court's denial of his petition for resentencing *912 pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.18, a provision added by Proposition 47. 1 We previously denied his petition, holding that his felony conviction for receiving stolen property under section 496 was not subject to reduction to a misdemeanor because the fair market value of the two stolen debit cards in his possession was more than $950 as measured by the amounts in the victim's bank accounts linked to the cards, the only evidence of value in the record.

The California Supreme Court granted review and transferred the matter to us with directions to vacate our decision and reconsider the issue in light of People v. Romanowski (2017) 2 Cal.5th 903 , 215 Cal.Rptr.3d 758 , 391 P.3d 633 ( Romanowski ). Romanowski confirmed that the " 'reasonable and fair market value' " test from section 484 is the proper measure of the $950 value threshold for theft crimes. ( Romanowski, at p. 914, 215 Cal.Rptr.3d 758 , 391 P.3d 633 .) As applied to stolen access card information, the court held the fair market value is measured by "how much [the] stolen…

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.