People v. Gallegos CA5
Filed 4/29/16 P. v. Gallegos CA5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
THE PEOPLE, F069355 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. MCR043416 & v. MCR043662)
PAUL DAVID GALLEGOS II, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.
THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Madera County. Mitchell C. Rigby, Judge. Francine R. Tone, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Julie A. Hokans and Henry J. Valle, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-
* Before Kane, Acting P.J., Franson, J. and Peña, J.
On May 18, 2012, defendant Paul David Gallegos II was convicted by guilty plea of felony possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)) in case No. MCR043416 for a crime he committed in 2011. The trial court deferred entry of judgment pending defendant’s successful completion of a program, which he ultimately failed to complete. On September 18, 2012, defendant was convicted by guilty plea of burglary (Pen. Code, § 459)1 in case No. MCR043662. On May 2, 2014, the trial court sentenced him to four years for the burglary conviction and eight months (one-third the middle term) for the possession of a controlled substance conviction. Defendant filed a notice of appeal on May 7, 2014. On appeal, defendant’s sole contention is that section 1170.18 applies to him retroactively and therefore we should reduce his felony conviction for possession of a controlled substance to a misdemeanor. The People respond that defendant may not seek this remedy here, but must instead file a petition with the trial court. We agree and dismiss the appeal. DISCUSSION While defendant’s appeal was pending, on November 4, 2014, voters enacted Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (hereafter Proposition 47), and it went into effect the next day. (People v. Rivera (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1085, 1089.) “Proposition 47 makes certain drug- and theft-related offenses misdemeanors, unless the offenses were committed by certain ineligible defendants. These offenses had previously been designated as either felonies or wobblers (crimes that can be punished as either felonies or misdemeanors).” (Id. at p. 1091.) Among the enumerated offenses set forth in Proposition 47 is possession of a controlled substance. (See Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a).)
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)