People v. Edward CA2/4

Filed 10/9/15 P. v. Edward CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B257940

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA180721) v.

MEL TYRONE EDWARD,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William C. Ryan, Judge. Affirmed. Nancy L. Tetreault, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill and Mary Sanchez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________

Defendant Mel Tyrone Edward appeals from a post conviction order denying his petition for resentencing as a second-strike offender under Proposition 36, the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012. (Pen. Code, § 1170.126.)1 The trial court denied the petition on the ground that resentencing defendant would create an “unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.” (§1170.126, subd. (f).) Defendant argues that because Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, provides a different definition of “unreasonable risk of danger to public safety” than the one provided in Proposition 36, he is entitled to a new suitability hearing under the revised standard. We do not agree, and affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In October 1999, defendant was convicted by a jury of one felony count of possession of crack cocaine. (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a).) He was found to have sustained two prior felony strike convictions for second degree robbery, and to have served two prior prison terms. After his Romero2 motion was denied, he received a third- strike sentence of 27 years to life. (§§ 667, subd. (e)(2), 1170.12, subd. (c)(2), 667.5, subd. (b).) We affirmed his conviction in a prior appeal. (People v. Edward (Oct. 10, 2000, No. B136661) [nonpub. opn.].) In November 2012, California voters approved Proposition 36, which amended the Three Strikes law by limiting the imposition of an indeterminate life sentence to those defendants whose third felony is defined as serious or violent. (§ 1170.126, subd. (b).) Proposition 36 also allowed those serving indeterminate life sentences for a third felony that is neither serious nor violent to “seek court review of their indeterminate sentences