People v. James CA2/3

Filed 1/13/22 P. v. James CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE

THE PEOPLE, B313321

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. A195553) v.

MARVIN LEE JAMES,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Hector M. Guzman, Judge. Affirmed. Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Chung L. Mar and Noah P. Hill, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ——————————

Marvin Lee James appeals from an order denying his petition to redesignate a prior felony conviction for burglary as a misdemeanor offense pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (f).1 Because the superior court properly ruled that James was ineligible for relief as a matter of law, we affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

On December 17, 1979, James was convicted of one count of second degree burglary pursuant to a guilty plea. He was sentenced to a term of 16 months in state prison. On May 5, 2021, James filed a section 1170.18 petition, seeking to have his prior burglary conviction redesignated as a misdemeanor. In the printed form petition, James checked the boxes alleging that the amount in question was not more than $950, and that he did not have a prior conviction for an offense specified in section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(C)(iv) or which required registration as a sex offender under section 290, subdivision (c). In their response, the People opposed the petition, asserting that James was ineligible for section 1170.18 relief because he had a prior conviction for violation of section 288a, subdivision (c). On May 17, 2021, the superior court summarily denied the petition. In its minute order, the court stated James was disqualified from relief under section 1170.18 because he had a prior conviction for an offense listed in section 667, subdivision (e)(2)(C)(iv). The court identified the disqualifying offense as a violation of section 288a, subdivision (c).