People v. Riley CA5

Filed 3/29/21 P. v. Riley 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F078940 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F17904054) v.

BRIAN DOUGLAS RILEY, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Jonathan B. Conklin, Judge. Martin Baker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Julie A. Hokans and Timothy A. O’Hair, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P.J., Smith, J. and DeSantos, J.

In 2017, defendant Brian Douglas Riley pled no contest to two counts of felony unauthorized use of personal identifying information of another person and admitted he was on bail on two other matters at the time of the offenses. In 2018, he filed a petition pursuant to Proposition 47 for resentencing and reduction of his convictions to misdemeanors. The trial court denied defendant’s petition. On appeal, he contends the trial court erred in concluding that identity theft was not a “theft-related offense” subject to reduction pursuant to Proposition 47. We affirm. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY On July 14, 2017, the Fresno County District Attorney charged defendant with two counts of felony unauthorized use of personal identifying information of another person1 (Pen. Code, § 530.5, subd. (a);2 counts 1 & 2) and one count of misdemeanor possession of the personal identifying information of another person (§ 530.5, subd. (c)(1); count 3). The information further alleged that defendant had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) and was released from custody on bail on two different matters at the time of the offenses. On December 14, 2017, defendant pled no contest on counts 1 and 2, and admitted he was released from custody on bail on two different matters during the commission of the offenses.3 In exchange, the prosecutor agreed to a split sentence of seven years eight months—three years 10 months in custody and three years 10 months on mandatory supervision. On January 19, 2018, the trial court imposed the indicated sentence.