People v. Taylor CA2/1

Filed 12/4/15 P. v. Taylor CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, B263405

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA021660) v.

MICHAEL DAVID TAYLOR,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Robert M. Martinez, Judge. Affirmed. Tyrone A. Sandoval, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. __________________________

Michael David Taylor appeals from an order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.18.1 We affirm. In 1994, Taylor was convicted or one count of second degree robbery (§ 211) and one count of attempted second degree robbery (§§ 211, 664). The court sentenced Taylor to 25 years to life under the “Three Strikes” law (§ 667) on each count, to be served consecutively, and resentenced appellant in 1996 to add two five-year enhancements for two prior robbery convictions (in 1984 & 1988) under section 667, subdivision (a)(1). In December 2012, Taylor petitioned for resentencing pursuant to Proposition 36, the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012. (§ 1170.126.) The trial court denied the petition because his offenses were serious and/or violent felonies, a ruling we affirmed. (People v. Taylor (Oct. 19, 2013, B247962) [nonpub. opn.].) On November 4, 2014, California voters passed Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, which reduces certain nonserious and nonviolent crimes, such as low-level drug- and theft-related offenses, from felonies to misdemeanors. (People v. Contreras (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 868, 889-890.) A qualifying person serving a sentence for a felony that was reclassified under Proposition 47 may petition the trial court for a recall of sentence and request resentencing, which must be granted “unless the court, in its discretion, determines that resentencing the petitioner would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety.” (§ 1170.18, subds. (a)-(c).) On February 3, 2015, Taylor filed a petition requesting recall and resentencing on the 1994 robbery and attempted robbery convictions. On March 4, 2015, the trial court denied the petition on the ground that neither offense is “one of the enumerated charges eligible for reduction and resentencing” under Proposition 47. Taylor filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Taylor but, after an examination of the record, counsel filed a Wende brief raising no issues and asking this court to independently