People v. Schlapkohl CA1/1
Filed 9/27/22 P. v. Schlapkohl CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A162971 v. CARLEY SCHLAPKOHL, (Mendocino County Super. Ct. Nos. Defendant and Appellant. SCUK CRCR 2019-33723-1, SCUK CRCR 2020-35131-1)
Defendant Carley Schlapkohl entered pleas of no contest in two cases and was sentenced to three years and eight months in prison, including the middle term of three years for recklessly causing an inhabited structure to burn. On appeal, her sole claim is that she is entitled to a remand under Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021–2022) (Assembly Bill No. 124), which amended Penal Code section 1170 to make the lower term the presumptive sentence under specified circumstances.1 We agree with her position, and we therefore
Technically, the amendment at issue was made under Senate Bill 1
No. 567 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.), which incorporated changes originally introduced under Assembly Bill No. 124. (People v. Gerson (2022) 80 Cal.App.5th 1067, 1074, fn. 2 (Gerson).) For purposes of consistency with the parties’ usage, we refer to Assembly Bill No. 124 instead of Senate Bill No. 567. (See Gerson, at p. 1074, fn. 2.) All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted.
1
vacate the sentence and remand for a full resentencing in accordance with the new legislation. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On December 16, 2019, a Mendocino County Sheriff’s deputy on patrol in Calpella noticed a car with its front bumper partially detached and its “front license plate light” missing.2 After the deputy activated his emergency lights and attempted to stop the car, the car accelerated, leading him on a chase that lasted over 10 minutes and reached speeds of over 115 miles per hour. The car ultimately lost control during a turn and came to rest facing the wrong way on the street. When contacted, the driver, Schlapkohl, admitted that she knew the deputy was a law enforcement officer and was trying to stop her, but she told him that she “thought [he] was an officer who[m] she had a problem with and didn’t want to stop.” Based on these actions, she was charged in case no. SCUK CRCR 2019-33723-1 with a felony count of reckless driving while evading a peace officer (the evading case).3 In an unrelated incident, early on the morning of February 21, 2020, Schlapkohl’s boyfriend woke up to discover that a dog mattress on the front porch of his Willits home was on fire. He and Schlapkohl had fought the previous evening, and she and his truck were gone. Schlapkohl smoked on the porch and sometimes used a propane torch to light her cigarettes. According to an arson investigator, the fire, which eventually “destroyed” the home, was intentionally set.
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)