People v. Acevedo CA3

Filed 6/27/23 P. v. Acevedo CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C097122

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 17FE022399)

v.

JUNIOR JEREMIAH ACEVEDO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Junior Jeremiah Acevedo pled no contest to one count of unlawful sexual penetration of a minor and one count of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor in exchange for 365 days in jail and five years of formal probation. Defendant was advised he would be required to register as a sex offender under Penal Code1 section 290.

1 Undesignated section references are to the Penal Code.

1

Following the enactment of Senate Bill No. 145 (2019-2020 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2020, ch. 79, § 2), defendant filed a motion to modify a condition of his probation. Defendant argued Senate Bill No. 145 applies retroactively to him and exempts him from mandatory sex offender registration under section 290 because he was not more than 10 years older than the minor when the unlawful sexual penetration offense occurred (§ 290, subd. (c)(2)). He requested that the trial court “delete the condition of probation that he be required to register as a sex offender.” The trial court denied the motion. Defendant appeals. We affirm. We conclude the mandatory sex offender registration requirement was not imposed as a condition of probation. The trial court thus did not err in denying defendant’s section 1203.3, subdivision (a) motion. We decline defendant’s request to construe his motion as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. As we explain, the record does not conclusively establish that defendant is exempt from discretionary sex offender registration under section 290.006 as a matter of law. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2018, at the hearing during which defendant entered his plea, defendant’s counsel laid out the terms of the plea agreement and the prosecutor informed the court, “[T]his is a [section] 290 . . . registration case.” The prosecutor then laid out the stipulated factual basis for the plea, which included that the unlawful sexual penetration victim was 15 years old and defendant was 18 years old at the time of the offense. The trial court advised defendant of the consequences arising from pleading no contest to the charges, including that defendant would “be required to register as a convicted sex offender within the meaning of . . . [s]ection 290 for the remainder of [his] life.” After defendant said he understood the consequences and confirmed his intent to enter the plea, the trial court accepted the plea. At the imposition of judgment and sentencing hearing, the trial court confirmed the parties’ agreement “at the time of the change of plea was five years [of] formal