People v. Heflen CA3

California Court of Appeal Aug 8, 2022 No. C093900Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that amendments to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (b)(6), which create a presumptive lower term for defendants whose psychological or childhood trauma contributed to their offense, apply retroactively to nonfinal cases. Because the trial court did not have the benefit of this statute at the time of sentencing, the case must be remanded for resentencing.

Issues

Do the legislative changes to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (b)(6) apply retroactively to nonfinal cases?
Did the trial court err by failing to consider the defendant's psychological or childhood trauma as a mitigating factor under the amended sentencing statute?

Disposition. remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“We will remand the case for resentencing.”

“The legislation amended section 1170 to require courts to impose the lower term on convictions if a defendant’s childhood trauma or psychological trauma were contributing factors in the commission of the offense”

“The record before us does not make it clear that the trial court would have imposed the upper term had section 1170, subdivision (b)(6) been in effect at the time.”

Filed 8/8/22 P. v. Heflen CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Butte) ----

THE PEOPLE, C093900

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. 20CF00422, 18CM02638, SCR103509) v.

MICHAELLE MARGUERITE HEFLEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

The trial court sentenced defendant Michaelle Marguerite Heflen to the upper term of six years in state prison after she was convicted of child endangerment, among other charges. On appeal, defendant argues her case must be remanded because of legislative changes made to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (b)(6) that, among other things,

altered the process for sentencing a defendant who has suffered psychological or childhood trauma.1 We will remand the case for resentencing. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND This appeal involves three cases, all of which defendant pled no contest to, and sentencing was imposed for each case on the same date. Case No. SCR103509 In Butte County Superior Court case No. SCR103509, defendant failed to adequately care for a horse and the prosecution charged her with misdemeanor failure to care for animals. (Former Pen. Code, § 597f.)2 On September 23, 2015, defendant pleaded no contest to the charge, and the trial court placed her on probation. In February of 2018, her probation was revoked, and a bench warrant was subsequently issued for her arrest. The prosecution filed a petition for revocation of defendant’s probation on May 31, 2018. After a series of citations issued to defendant to appear on the petition, followed by numerous failures to appear, defendant finally appeared in court for arraignment on the petition on October 4, 2019. The prosecution subsequently added three counts to the original complaint in this matter: two charges of violating a promise to appear (§ 853.7), and a failure to appear charge (§ 1320, subd. (a)). On March 4, 2020, defendant waived her right to a jury trial and pleaded no contest to the three new charges. Case No. 18CM02638 In Butte County Superior Court case No. 18CM02638, deputies searched defendant during an arrest and found methamphetamine in her pocket. On May 16, 2018,

People v. Heflen CA3

AI Brief

THE PEOPLE, C093900

MICHAELLE MARGUERITE HEFLEN,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief