People v. Vieira CA5

California Court of Appeal Jun 25, 2024 No. F086748Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court erred in denying the defendant's petition for a certificate of rehabilitation as premature, because the statutory period of rehabilitation commences upon the earlier of release from prison or discharge from parole.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in calculating the commencement date of the petitioner's period of rehabilitation under Penal Code section 4852.03.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The period of rehabilitation commences upon the discharge of the petitioner from custody due to his or her completion of the term to which he or she was sentenced or upon his or her release on parole, … whichever is sooner.”

“Therefore, the superior court’s contrary conclusion was an error of law. We reverse the superior court’s denial of Viera’s petition.”

Filed 6/25/24 P. v. Vieira 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F086748 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 1471738) v.

ANTHONY JOSEPH VIEIRA, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Nancy A. Leo, Judge. Sandra Gillies, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Darren K. Indermill and Erin Doering, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P. J., Franson, J. and Meehan, J.

Anthony Joseph Vieira was sentenced in 2015 to a term of three years and eight months in prison for assault on a peace officer and other charges. He was released from prison on parole in 2016 and discharged from parole in January 2018. Viera filed a petition for a certificate of rehabilitation and pardon on June 6, 2023, that the court denied as premature. As the People concede, this was error. We accept the People’s concession and reverse.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND1 Vieira pleaded no contest on April 21, 2015, to assault on a peace officer likely to produce great bodily injury (Pen. Code,2 § 245, subd. (c)) and evading a police officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)). The superior court sentenced Vieira that same day to three years and eight months in prison. On June 6, 2023, Vieira filed a petition requesting a certificate of rehabilitation and pardon pursuant to section 4852.01. Vieira alleged that he had been released from custody to parole on January 21, 2016, and was discharged from parole on January 21, 2018.3 The prosecutor filed an opposition to the request and argued that Vieira did not qualify for relief because he had not completed the necessary seven-year period of rehabilitation, which she calculated from the date Vieira was discharged from parole on January 15, 2018. (See § 4852.03, subd. (a)(3).) The court agreed with the prosecutor and denied Vieira’s petition without prejudice for refiling in two years. Vieira filed a timely notice of appeal on August 21, 2023.

People v. Vieira CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief