People v. Ruiz CA5

Filed 12/7/20 P. v. Ruiz 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F079831 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F15907129) v.

ARMANDO RUIZ, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Adolfo M. Corona, Judge. Moran Law Firm, Amanda K. Moran and Janay D. Kinder for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Carlos A. Martinez and Catherine Tennant Nieto, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Levy, Acting P.J., Franson, J. and Peña, J.

Defendant Armando Ruiz stands convicted of misdemeanor possession of child pornography. After completing the terms of his probation, he sought dismissal of the charge. The trial court found defendant was statutorily ineligible for relief. Defendant contends on appeal that Penal Code sections 1203.41 and 4852.01 are in conflict. He asks that we resolve the purported conflict and find he is eligible for relief pursuant to section 1203.4. We affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On December 2, 2015, the Fresno County District Attorney charged defendant with felony possession of child pornography (§ 311.11, subd. (a); count 1). On June 14, 2016, defendant pled no contest on count 1. On October 19, 2016, the trial court reduced defendant’s conviction from a felony to a misdemeanor and granted him three years’ formal probation. The terms of probation included: completion of a sex offender treatment program, performance of 50 hours of community service, registration pursuant to section 290, and payment of various fines and fees. On July 30, 2018, defendant moved to terminate his probation pursuant to section 1203.3 and dismiss count 1 pursuant to section 1203.4. The trial court granted the motion to terminate probation but did not rule on defendant’s motion to dismiss. On April 10, 2019, the trial court denied without prejudice defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to section 1203.4. On July 1, 2019, defendant filed a second motion to dismiss pursuant to section 1203.4 and sought for the first time a certificate of rehabilitation pursuant to section 4852.01. On August 1, 2019, the court denied defendant’s motion in full. On August 20, 2019, defendant filed a notice of appeal.