People v. Stevens CA2/5

Filed 10/4/16 P. v. Stevens CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B268146

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. NA101531) v.

JAMES CHARLES STEVENS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Laura L. Laesecke, Judge. Affirmed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Mary Sanchez and Andrew S. Pruitt, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I. INTRODUCTION Defendant, James Charles Stevens, appeals from an order denying his Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (a) resentencing petition.1 As will be noted, at no time was a defendant charged with nor convicted of offenses which rendered him eligible for resentencing. And, he is estopped to contest his state prison sentence because he entered into a sentence bargain. We affirm the order. II. BACKGROUND On November 4, 2014, California voters adopted Proposition 47, including section 1170.18. (Prop. 47, § 14, as approved by voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2014).) On March 31, 2015, after section 1170.18 was adopted, defendant committed several offenses. In the amended felony complaint, defendant was charged with theft in violation of section 484e, subdivision (d), acquiring or retaining possession of access cards (count 2, 3 and 4). In addition, defendant was charged in count 5 with forgery relating to an item exceeding $950 in value. Further, the amended felony complaint alleges defendant had previously been convicted of a serious felony, a violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(1). (§§ 667, subd. (e)(2)(C), 1170.18, subd. (i); 1192.7, subd. (c)(31).) Finally, the amended felony complaint alleges that defendant had previously served nine prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b).) On May 14, 2015, defendant appeared before Judge Judith L. Meyer. Defendant entered into a sentence bargain with Judge Meyer. He agreed to serve five years in prison. Judge Meyer stated defendant faced from 14 to 15 years in potential custody if convicted on all counts. Judge Meyer stated he would be required to serve 80 percent of the term if convicted on all the charged counts in prison. In exchange for the five year prison term, defendant pled guilty to all the counts and admitted all the prior serious felony and prison term allegations. Defendant, without objection, was then sentenced to state prison for five years.