People v. Shellock CA1/5

Filed 3/10/21 P. v. Shellock CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A158972 v. GENESIS C. SHELLOCK, (San Mateo County Super. Ct. No. SC083423A) Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant Genesis C. Shellock (Appellant) appeals from the trial court’s summary denial of his Penal Code section 1170.181 petition seeking reclassification of a conviction under Vehicle Code section 10851 as a misdemeanor. Because any error by the court was harmless, we affirm. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In June 2015, the San Mateo County District Attorney filed an information charging Appellant with seven crimes arising out of a January 2015 incident: driving or taking a vehicle (a motorcycle) without consent after a prior conviction (Veh. Code, § 10851; § 666.5); fleeing a pursuing peace officer’s motor vehicle while driving recklessly (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)); leaving the scene of an accident (Veh. Code, § 20001, subd. (a)); false

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

personation (§ 529, subd. (a)(3)); two counts of giving false information to a police officer (§ 148.9, subd. (a)); and misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350, subd. (a)). The information further alleged prior strike convictions (§§ 667, subd. (d), 1170.12, subd. (b)) and prior prison terms (§ 667.5). In January 2016, a jury found Appellant guilty of all charges, and the trial court found the alleged priors true. In June, the court sentenced Appellant to prison for nine years eight months. The court also ordered Appellant to pay victim restitution to the owner of the stolen motorcycle in the amount of $5,976.29. In July 2017, this court affirmed the judgment. (People v. Shellock (July 20, 2017, A148591) [nonpub. opn.]).2 In March 2019, Appellant petitioned under section 1170.18 for resentencing on his conviction for violating Vehicle Code section 10851. The San Mateo County District Attorney opposed the petition and, in September, the trial court summarily denied the petition. This appeal followed. FACTUAL BACKGROUND This court’s prior opinion summarized the underlying incident, in relevant part, as follows: “On a January 2015 afternoon, California Highway Patrol Officer William Torr was on Interstate 280 when he saw a man—later identified as Shellock—driving a motorcycle over 100 miles per hour in a 65- mile-per-hour zone. As Officer Torr pursued the motorcycle in his patrol car with lights and sirens activated, Shellock weaved through traffic, traveling approximately 110 miles per hour. Shellock exited the freeway and Officer Torr followed. [¶] Along the freeway offramp, Officer Torr found the motorcycle on its side, just behind the rear of a Volvo. The motorcycle had