People v. Alcantar CA5
Filed 7/15/15 P. v. Alcantar CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, F069143 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. PCF242897) v.
JUAN EDUARDO ALCANTAR, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Kathryn T. Montejano, Judge. Mark J. Shusted, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, State of California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Kane, Acting P. J., Poochigian, J. and Peña, J.
Juan Eduardo Alcantar filed a petition to have his felony conviction for evading a police officer reduced to a misdemeanor pursuant to the provisions of Penal Code section 17, subdivision (b).1 The trial court denied the petition, and Alcantar filed a notice of appeal. Appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. By letter dated July 8, 2013, we invited Alcantar to inform us of any grounds for the appeal he would like us to consider. Our letter was returned as undeliverable. We have reviewed the record and conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion when it denied Alcantar’s petition. Accordingly, we affirm the order. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY In 2010 Alcantar pled no contest to felony evading a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) and driving with a blood-alcohol content above .08 percent (id., § 23152, subd. (b)). He was sentenced to felony probation on the condition he spend 300 days in custody and attend various classes related to the driving under the influence of alcohol count. It appears from the record that Alcantar successfully completed all of the terms and conditions of probation. On January 22, 2014, Alcantar filed a petition to have the felony reduced to a misdemeanor pursuant to section 17, subdivision (b)(3). Presumably, if the petition was granted, Alcantar would file a petition to have the charges dismissed pursuant to section 1203.4. Alcantar explained that he was seeking relief because he had changed his life and was no longer a danger to society, his convictions made it difficult to obtain employment, and he recently had married and needed employment to support his family.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)