People v. Ramirez CA2/2

Filed 12/17/15 P. v. Ramirez CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B263169

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. KA061048, v. KA058017)

SANDRA MADRIGAL RAMIREZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Steven P. Sanora, Judge. Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Carlos Ramirez, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Mary Sanchez, Deputy Attorney General, and Wyatt E. Bloomfield, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

Defendant Sandra Madrigal Ramirez (defendant) filed an application to have her 1 2002 felony conviction for receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a)) and her 2003 felony convictions for second-degree commercial burglary (§ 459) and possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377) redesignated as misdemeanors pursuant to Proposition 47 (Pen. Code, § 1170.18, subd. (f)). The trial court granted the application as to the drug conviction, but declined to redesignate the receiving stolen property and second-degree commercial burglary convictions as misdemeanors. On appeal from those denials, we conclude that the court properly denied the application as to the second-degree commercial burglary conviction, but erred in determining that defendant’s receiving stolen property conviction was ineligible for redesignation. We accordingly remand so the court may consider whether “resentencing [defendant] would pose an unreasonable risk to public safety.” FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In July 2002, defendant possessed a backpack containing check drafts, blank checks, social security cards, California driver’s licenses, debit cards and financial statements belonging to several people who did not authorize her to possess those items. The People charged defendant with five separate felony counts of receiving stolen property. (§ 496, subd. (a).) Four of those counts pertained to items belonging to specific individuals, and the fifth count pertained to the remaining “bank statements, checks, credit cards and social security cards.” Defendant entered a plea to the first count involving the “checkbook, checks and papers of Donnetta Grays,” which encompassed a “VOID” check for $106 and a blank check. As part of defendant’s plea bargain, the court dismissed the remaining counts. The court placed defendant on three years’ probation and imposed a 90-day jail sentence. In March 2003, defendant possessed methamphetamine. She also walked into a Top Dollar 99 Cent Store and an Exxon Mobil gas station with credit cards belonging to someone else, and used them to purchase $60.53 and $56.13 in merchandise,