California Court of Appeal May 12, 2016 No. E063632Unpublished
Filed 5/12/16 P. v. Young CA4/2
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E063632
v. (Super.Ct.No. SWF028989)
ISAAC JERRY YOUNG, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Becky Dugan, Judge.
Affirmed.
Gerald J. Miller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Appellant.
Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney
General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Barry Carlton and Sabrina Y.
Lane-Erwin, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
1
Defendant and appellant Isaac Jerry Young appeals from the trial court’s order
denying his petition for recall of sentence under Penal Code section 1170.18.1 We affirm
the order.
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
On June 15, 2009, defendant was involved in the theft of two separate vehicles.
therefore could not be resentenced in accordance with any of the sections added or
explicitly amended by Proposition 47. Put another way: Exactly the same sentencing
considerations apply to defendant’s conviction offenses before and after Proposition 47,
so there is no basis for reconsidering or reducing the sentence that was initially imposed.
Neither does Proposition 47 apply to theft of vehicles through the use of section
490.2, subdivision (a), which states that obtaining any property by theft where the
“money, labor, real or personal property taken does not exceed nine hundred fifty dollars
($950) shall be considered petty theft.” Section 490.2 does no more than amend the
6
definition of grand theft, as articulated in section 487 or any other provision of law,
redefining a limited subset of offenses that would formerly have been grand theft to be
petty theft. (§ 490.2.) Vehicle Code section 10851 with priors does not proscribe theft of
either the grand or petty variety, but rather the taking or driving of a vehicle “with or
without intent to steal” (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a); see People v. Garza (2005) 35
Cal.4th 866, 876 [Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a) “‘proscribes a wide range of conduct,’”
and may be violated “‘either by taking a vehicle with the intent to steal it or by driving it
with the intent only to temporarily deprive its owner of possession (i.e., joyriding)’”].)
Section 490.2 is simply inapplicable to defendant’s conviction offenses.
In short, the offenses of which defendant was convicted are not among those
reduced to a misdemeanor by Proposition 47, so the trial court correctly determined him
to be ineligible for recall of his sentence and resentencing pursuant to section 1170.18.
DISPOSITION
The court’s order is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS RAMIREZ P. J.
We concur:
McKINSTER J.
CODRINGTON J.
7
AI Brief
AI-generated · verify before citing
Holding. The court held that a conviction for unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle with a prior vehicle theft conviction under Vehicle Code section 10851 and Penal Code section 666.5 is not eligible for resentencing under Proposition 47.
Issues
Whether a conviction for unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle with a prior vehicle theft conviction qualifies for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.18.
Disposition. Affirmed
Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion
“Unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle with prior vehicle theft convictions (§ 666.5, subd. (a), Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)), does not appear on the list of felonies reduced to misdemeanors by Proposition 47.”
“The offenses of which defendant was convicted are not among those reduced to a misdemeanor by Proposition 47, so the trial court correctly determined him to be ineligible for recall of his sentence and resentencing pursuant to section 1170.18.”