In re Guyton CA5

Filed 6/8/21 In re Guyton 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

In re FRANCISCO G. GUYTON F077953

On Habeas Corpus.

THE COURT* ORIGINAL PROCEEDINGS; petition for writ of habeas corpus. Sylvia W. Beckham, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Petitioner. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Matthew Rodriquez, Acting Attorney General, Phillip J. Lindsay, Assistant Attorney General, Jessica N. Blonien and Maria G. Chan, Deputy Attorneys General, for Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Detjen, Acting P.J., Smith, J. and Meehan, J.

INTRODUCTION In 2016, voters approved Proposition 57, which added a provision to the California Constitution that significantly expanded parole eligibility for all state prisoners convicted of a nonviolent felony offense. (Cal. Const., art. I, § 32, subd. (a)(1).) Petitioner Francisco G. Guyton contends the implementing regulations promulgated by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) invalidly exclude him from Proposition 57 relief based on a prior conviction that requires him to register as a sex offender under the Sex Offender Registration Act (Pen. Code, §§ 290-290.024). During the pendency of this petition, petitioner was afforded an initial parole consideration hearing, apparently due to his having reached his minimum eligible parole date (Pen. Code, § 3046, subd. (a)(2)). Additionally, our Supreme Court invalidated the regulations at issue here in In re Gadlin (2020) 10 Cal.5th 915 (Gadlin). Accordingly, petitioner has received the relief he requests in this matter, and the petition no longer presents an actual controversy. We therefore discharge our order to show cause and deny the petition as moot. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In 1999, a jury convicted petitioner of failure to register as a sex offender. (Former Pen. Code, § 290, subd. (g)(2), now codified as Pen. Code, § 290.018, subd. (b).) (People v. Guyton (Sep. 13, 2000, C032739) [nonpub. opn.] (Guyton).) In the same case, petitioner admitted three prior serious felony convictions: (1) a 1979 conviction for first degree burglary; (2) a 1979 conviction for forcible oral copulation; and (3) a 1979 conviction for forcible sodomy. (Ibid.; see Pen. Code, §§ 667, subd. (d), 1170.12, subd. (b).) Petitioner was sentenced to a term of 25 years to life pursuant to the Three Strikes law. (Guyton, C032739; see Pen. Code, §§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subd. (c)). On appeal, the Third District Court of Appeal affirmed. (Guyton, C032739.) Our Supreme Court denied review. (Id., review denied Nov. 29, 2000, S092431.)