People v. Louder CA2/2

Filed 3/10/16 P. v. Louder CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B265170

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA105295) v.

KWAME LOUDER,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Laura R. Walton, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions.

Jackie Lacey, District Attorney, Steven Katz, Head Deputy District Attorney, and Matthew Brown, Deputy District Attorney, for Plaintiff and Appellant.

Ronald L. Brown, Public Defender, Albert J. Menaster, Carole Telfer, Mark Harvis, Deputy Public Defenders, for Defendant and Respondent.

___________________________________________________

The People appeal1 from the postjudgment order granting the motion of defendant Kwame Louder to recall his felony sentence and strike four 1-year prior prison term enhancements (Pen. Code, § 667.5, subd. (b), hereinafter, § 667.5(b))2 pursuant to section 1170.18, added by Proposition 47.3 The People contend the trial court committed reversible error by striking the four 1-year prior prison term enhancements, because Proposition 47 is not retroactive, and, thus, the subsequent reclassification of the felony convictions underlying these

1 In B264559, this court denied the People’s writ of mandate petition. 2 All further section references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. 3 Proposition 47 was an initiative measure approved by the voters (Gen. Elec. Nov. 4, 2014) and took effect on November 5, 2014 (see Cal. Const., art. II, § 10 [initiative statute “takes effect the day after the election unless the measure provides otherwise”]). “The initiative: added Government Code chapter 33 of division 7 of title 1 (§ 7599 et seq., the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund); added sections 459.5, 490.2 and 1170.18 to the Penal Code; amended sections 473, 476a, 496 and 666 of the Penal Code; and amended Health and Safety Code sections 11350, 11357 and 11377. (Voter Information Guide, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014) text of Prop. 47, §§ 4-14, pp. 70-74.) The electorate’s stated purpose and intent was to ‘(1) Ensure that people convicted of murder, rape, and child molestation will not benefit from this act. [¶] (2) Create the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Fund . . . for crime prevention and support programs in K-12 schools, . . . for trauma recovery services for crime victims, and . . . for mental health and substance abuse treatment programs to reduce recidivism of people in the justice system. [¶] (3) Require misdemeanors instead of felonies for nonserious, nonviolent crimes like petty theft and drug possession, unless the defendant has prior convictions for specified violent or serious crimes. [¶] (4) Authorize consideration of resentencing for anyone who is currently serving a sentence for any of the offenses listed herein that are now misdemeanors. [¶] (5) Require a thorough review of criminal history and risk assessment of any individuals before resentencing to ensure that they do not pose a risk to public safety. [¶] (6) [And to] save significant state corrections dollars on an annual basis [and] increase investments in programs that reduce crime and improve public safety, such as prevention programs in K-12 schools, victim services, and mental health and drug treatment, which will reduce future expenditures for corrections.’ (Voter Information Guide, supra, text of Prop. 47, § 3, p. 70.)” (People v. Shabazz (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 303, 308.)