People v. Storment CA6

Filed 2/29/16 P. v. Storment CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H042338 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. SS100799)

v.

ROGER STORMENT,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Roger Storment pleaded guilty to felony forgery (Pen. Code, § 470, subd. (d))1 and other crimes in exchange for the dismissal of other pending charges. After Storment was sentenced, voters approved Proposition 47, “The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act” (§ 1170.18), which reduced certain felonies to misdemeanors. It also allows a person currently serving a felony sentence for an offense that is now a misdemeanor to petition for a recall of that sentence and for resentencing to a misdemeanor. Storment petitioned to have his forgery conviction reduced to a misdemeanor under Proposition 47 and for resentencing. The trial court denied his petition on the theory that resentencing Storment would deprive the People of the benefit of their bargain under the plea agreement. On appeal, the People concede that the trial court erred in denying Storment’s petition on the basis of the negotiated plea agreement. While the parties agree on that issue, they now dispute whether, in the event the court grants the petition on remand, the

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified.

People may withdraw from the plea agreement and reinstate the previously dismissed charges. We reverse and remand. We decline to express an opinion on the merit of a hypothetical motion to withdraw from the plea agreement. I. BACKGROUND The record does not set forth the underlying facts. In 2010, the Monterey County District Attorney filed an information charging Storment with one count of felony forgery in violation of section 470, subdivision (d). The information alleged that Storment had one prior serious or violent felony conviction under section 1170.12, subdivision (c)(1) and two prior prison terms under section 667.5, subdivision (b). Storment also faced criminal charges in two other matters. Storment and the People entered into a plea agreement resolving all three cases on May 24, 2011. Pursuant to the agreement, Storment pleaded no contest to forgery, burglary (§ 459), evading a pursuing peace officer while operating a motor vehicle (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)), and taking a vehicle without the owner’s consent (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)). Charges in the other two cases were dismissed as part of that plea agreement. The record does not disclose the nature of those charges. The trial court sentenced Storment to 10 years in prison, including a four-year term on the forgery conviction. On January 27, 2015, Storment petitioned to have his felony sentence on the forgery conviction recalled and to be resentenced to a misdemeanor pursuant to section 1170.18. The People opposed Storment’s petition, arguing he was ineligible for Proposition 47 relief because such relief would deny the People the benefit of the bargain of the plea agreement. The trial court agreed with the People and denied the petition on May 1, 2015. Storment timely appealed on May 19, 2015.