People v. Johnson CA2/3 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  • Filed 1/26/16 P. v. Johnson CA2/3
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
    California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
    publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication
    or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
    IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
    SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
    DIVISION THREE
    THE PEOPLE,                                                             B264665
    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                      (Los Angeles County
    Super. Ct. No. BA419478)
    v.
    CHAUNCY LYNN JOHNSON,
    Defendant and Appellant.
    APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County,
    Norm Shapiro, Judge. Affirmed.
    John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant
    and Appellant.
    No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
    _________________________
    Appellant Chauncy Lynn Johnson appeals from an order denying his petition for a
    recall of sentence after the trial court sentenced him to prison for six years following his
    plea of no contest to selling a controlled substance, having suffered a prior felony
    conviction. (Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (d), 1170.18, subd. (a); Health & Saf. Code,
    § 11352, subd. (a).) We affirm the order denying appellant’s petition for a recall
    of sentence.
    FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY
    On June 26, 2014, appellant pled no contest to selling a controlled substance and
    admitted a strike, and the court sentenced him to prison as previously indicated.1
    On May 4, 2015, appellant, in pro per, filed in the present case (superior court case
    No. BA419478) a petition for a recall of sentence pursuant to Penal Code section
    1170.18, subdivision (a).2 The petition alleged appellant was currently serving a sentence
    for the above violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a).
    On May 14, 2015, the trial court denied the petition on the ground appellant’s
    conviction for a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a) did
    not qualify for relief under Proposition 47. On June 1, 2015, appellant filed a notice of
    appeal.
    1
    A detailed recitation of the facts of the underlying offense is unnecessary. It is
    sufficient to note that in 2013, appellant sold cocaine base.
    2
    Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (a) states, “A person currently serving a
    sentence for a conviction, whether by trial or plea, of a felony or felonies who would
    have been guilty of a misdemeanor under the act that added this section (‘this act’) had
    this act been in effect at the time of the offense may petition for a recall of sentence
    before the trial court that entered the judgment of conviction in his or her case to request
    resentencing in accordance with Sections 11350, 11357, or 11377 of the Health and
    Safety Code, or Section 459.5, 473, 476a, 490.2, 496, or 666 of the Penal Code, as those
    sections have been amended or added by this act.”
    2
    CONTENTIONS
    After examination of the record, appointed appellate counsel filed an opening brief
    which raised no issues and requested this court to conduct an independent review of the
    record.
    By notice filed September 21, 2015, the clerk of this court advised appellant to
    submit within 30 days any contentions, grounds of appeal, or arguments he wished this
    court to consider. No response has been received to date.
    REVIEW ON APPEAL
    “ ‘On November 4, 2014, the voters enacted Proposition 47, “the Safe
    Neighborhoods and Schools Act” (hereafter Proposition 47), which went into effect the
    next day. (Cal. Const., art. II, § 10, subd. (a).)’ ” (T.W. v. Superior Court (2015)
    
    236 Cal.App.4th 646
    , 649, fn. 2 (T.W.).) “Section 1170.18 ‘was enacted as part of
    Proposition 47.’ ” (Ibid.) “Section 1170.18 provides a mechanism by which a person
    currently serving a felony sentence for an offense that is now a misdemeanor, may
    petition for a recall of that sentence and request resentencing in accordance with the
    offense statutes as added or amended by Proposition 47. ([Pen. Code,] § 1170.18,
    subd. (a).) A person who satisfies the criteria in subdivision (a) of section 1170.18, shall
    have his or her sentence recalled and be ‘resentenced to a misdemeanor . . . unless the
    court, in its discretion, determines that resentencing the petitioner would pose an
    unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.’ (Id., subd. (b).)” (T.W., supra,
    236 Cal.App.4th at p. 649, fn. 2, italics added.) “The initiative [Proposition 47] . . .
    added sections 459.5, 490.2 and 1170.18 to the Penal Code; amended sections 473, 476a,
    496 and 666 of the Penal Code; and amended Health and Safety Code sections 11350,
    11357 and 11377.” (People v. Shabazz (2015) 
    237 Cal.App.4th 303
    , 308.)
    Appellant’s petition demonstrates he was, within the meaning of Penal Code
    section 1170.18, subdivision (a), “currently serving a sentence for a conviction” of the
    felony of selling a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11352, subd. (a)). That
    crime is not listed in Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (a), nor was Health and
    Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a) added or amended by Proposition 47. It is
    3
    thus not true that “[a] person currently serving a sentence for a conviction . . . of a felony
    [of selling a controlled substance] . . . would have been guilty of a misdemeanor under
    the act that added this section (‘this act’) had this act been in effect at the time of the
    offense.” (Pen. Code, § 1170.18, subd. (a), italics added.) Proposition 47 left the
    offense of a violation of Health and Safety Code section 11352, subdivision (a)
    unchanged, and that offense is a felony. (Pen. Code, § 17, subd. (a); Health & Saf. Code,
    § 11352, subd. (a).) The trial court properly denied appellant’s Penal Code
    section 1170.18, subdivision (a) petition for a recall of sentence.
    We have examined the entire record and are satisfied counsel has complied fully
    with counsel’s responsibilities. (People v. Wende (1979) 
    25 Cal.3d 436
    , 443; Smith v.
    Robbins (2000) 
    528 U.S. 259
    , 278-284.)
    DISPOSITION
    The order denying appellant’s petition for a recall of sentence is affirmed.
    NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
    JONES, J. 
    We concur:
    EDMON, P. J.
    ALDRICH, J.
    *
    Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to
    article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.
    4
    

Document Info

Docket Number: B264665

Filed Date: 1/26/2016

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 4/18/2021