People v. Owens CA5

Filed 12/18/23 P. v. Owens 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F086336 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CF99638241) v.

CURTIS JAMES OWENS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Jonathan B. Conklin, Judge. Richard Jay Moller, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the State Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

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

INTRODUCTION Petitioner Curtis James Owens filed a petition for recall of sentence and resentencing pursuant to Proposition 47 and Penal Code1 section 1170.18. The superior court denied the petition on the ground petitioner was not entitled to relief. Petitioner’s appointed counsel asked this court to review the record to determine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.) Petitioner was advised of his right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. Petitioner responded, contending he is entitled to an evidentiary hearing regarding whether the value of property he took exceeded $950 and whether resentencing him would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to petitioner. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND On September 9, 1999, the Fresno County District Attorney filed an information charging petitioner with two counts of second degree vehicle burglary (§ 459; counts 1-2) and one misdemeanor count of possession of burglar’s tools (§ 466). The information also alleged that petitioner had suffered six strike priors. (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) On November 5, 1999, a jury found petitioner guilty on count 1 of attempted second degree vehicle burglary, on count 2 of second degree vehicle burglary, and on count 3 of possession of burglar’s tools. In bifurcated proceedings, the court found true all six strike priors. Petitioner was sentenced to concurrent terms of 25 years to life in prison pursuant to sections 667, subdivisions (b) through (i) and 1170.12. On January 3, 2023, petitioner filed a petition pursuant to section 1170.18, subdivision (a) to recall his sentence and reduce his felony convictions to misdemeanors.