People v. Chaidez CA3

Filed 2/24/16 P. v. Chaidez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C078625

v. (Super. Ct. Nos. 88720, 88721)

ROBERTO CHAIDEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appointed counsel for defendant Roberto Chaidez asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment. In 1989, in cases No. 88720 and 88721, a jury convicted defendant Roberto Chaidez of two counts of receiving stolen property (Pen. Code, § 4961) and one count each of first degree burglary (§ 459), child endangerment (§ 273a), vehicle theft (Veh.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

Code, § 10851), and leaving the scene of an accident (Veh. Code, § 20002, subd. (a)). (People v. Chaidez (Nov. 9, 2001, C037970) [nonpub. opn.].) The jury found true allegations defendant committed a felony while released from custody (§ 12022.1) and had sustained a prior serious felony conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)). (People v. Chaidez, supra, C037970.) Defendant was sentenced to serve 15 years eight months in state prison. The judgment was affirmed on appeal. (People v. Chaidez, supra, C037970.) In early 2015, defendant filed a petition for “re-designation of sentence” in both cases. Both petitions sought to reduce certain felony convictions to misdemeanors pursuant to Proposition 47. Case No. 88720: On February 6, 2015, the trial court denied defendant’s petition due to ineligibility based on current convictions. Defendant filed a motion for hearing and reconsideration of the trial court’s denial of resentencing under Proposition 47. On March 3, 2015, the trial court determined the items in the two counts of receiving stolen property did not exceed $950 in value and designated those convictions to be misdemeanors. Case No. 88721: On January 16, 2015, the trial court denied defendant’s petition due to ineligibility based on current convictions. Defendant filed a motion for hearing and reconsideration of the trial court’s denial of resentencing under Proposition 47. On March 3, 2015, the trial court denied defendant’s motion for hearing and reconsideration. On February 19, 2015, defendant, in propria persona, filed a notice of appeal in both cases “after resentence of acquittal judgment” from the trial court’s judgment of January 16, 2015.2