People v. Manson CA2/7

Filed 5/16/16 P. v. Manson CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, B266972

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. Nos. BA268009 & v. BA239864)

BRYAN MANSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from postjudgment orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, David M. Horwitz, Judge. Reversed and remanded. CT Turney and Pavithra Menon for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assitant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assitant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill and Mary Sanchez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ________________________

Bryan Manson suffered felony convictions in 2002 and 2004 for violating Health and Safety Code section 11350, subdivision (a), possession of a controlled substance (Los Angeles Superior Court case nos. BA239864 & BA268009). Both convictions were 1 subsequently dismissed pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.4. On May 19, 2015 Manson applied pursuant to section 1170.18, subdivision (f), to reclassify the two felony convictions as misdemeanors. The superior court denied the applications, ruling it lacked jurisdiction because the cases had previously been dismissed. Manson argues the trial court erred in concluding dismissal of a felony count under section 1203.4 precludes that felony from later being reclassified a misdemeanor under section 1170.18, subdivision (f), and the Attorney General concedes “appellant appears to be correct.” We agree, reverse the orders denying the applications and remand for the superior court to consider the applications on their merits. DISCUSSION 1. Reclassification of Felony Convictions as Misdemeanors Under Proposition 47 Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act, effective November 5, 2014, requires a misdemeanor sentence instead of a felony sentence for certain drug possession offenses; requires a misdemeanor sentence instead of a felony sentence for the crimes of petty theft, receiving stolen property and forging/writing bad checks when the amount involved is $950 or less; and allows a felony sentence (excluding a defendant from a misdemeanor sentence) for the specified crimes if a defendant has a prior conviction listed under section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(C)(iv), or a prior conviction for an offense requiring sex offender registration under section 290. (See People v. Shabazz (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 303, 308 & fn. 2; People v. Rivera (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1085, 1091.) As amended by Proposition 47, Health and Safety Code section 11350 now provides that a violation of that section is a misdemeanor unless the defendant has one or more prior convictions for an offense specified in section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(C)(iv) —which lists serious and violent felonies that are sometimes referred to as “‘super strike