People v. Rowland CA2/7

Filed 6/1/16 P. v. Rowland CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B263543

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA137088) v.

RICHARD ROWLAND,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Yvonne T. Sanchez, Judge. Affirmed. David Blake Chatfield, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________

Richard Rowland petitioned on March 23, 2015 to recall his current felony sentence for violating Health and Safety Code section 11377, subdivision (a), possession of a controlled substance, to request resentencing as a misdemeanor under Proposition 47, the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act (Pen. Code, § 1170.18).1 On April 9, 2015 the trial court denied the petition, finding Rowland was ineligible for resentencing under Proposition 47. Rowland filed a timely notice of appeal. We appointed counsel to represent Rowland on appeal. After examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief in which no issues were raised. On February 16, 2016 we advised Rowland he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. On March 7, 2016 the notice was returned by the Folsom State Prison marked “Return To Sender. Not Deliverable As Addressed. Unable To Forward.” Notations on the returned envelope indicate Rowland may have been released on PRCS (post-release community supervision).2 Proposition 47 requires a misdemeanor sentence instead of a felony sentence for certain drug possession offenses and for petty theft, receiving stolen property and forging/writing bad checks when the amount involved is $950 or less and requires resentencing for defendants currently serving felony sentences for the specified crimes unless the trial court finds an unreasonable public safety risk. (See People v. Shabazz (2015) 237 Cal.App.4th 303, 308 & fn. 2.) Section 1170.18, subdivision (i), however, provides that persons previously convicted of any of the offenses listed in section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(C)(iv), sometimes called “super strikes,” or for an offense requiring registration as a sex offender