Filed: Dec. 09, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 09, 2015
Summary: NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. OPINION McKINSTER , J. INTRODUCTION Defendant Jobany Avila appeals from the denial of his petition requesting redesignation of his conviction as a mis
Summary: NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. OPINION McKINSTER , J. INTRODUCTION Defendant Jobany Avila appeals from the denial of his petition requesting redesignation of his conviction as a misd..
More
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
OPINION
McKINSTER, J.
INTRODUCTION
Defendant Jobany Avila appeals from the denial of his petition requesting redesignation of his conviction as a misdemeanor under Penal Code section 1170.18.1 He contends (1) his conviction of receiving a stolen vehicle (§ 496d) qualified for resentencing under Proposition 47, and (2) equal protection principles require that section 496d offenses be treated as misdemeanors. We affirm.
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
As relevant to this appeal, defendant was charged in an information in 2007 with unlawfully driving or taking a vehicle, a 1998 Nissan Sentra. (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a).) Pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant entered a plea of no contest to the incidentally related offense of receiving a stolen vehicle (Pen. Code, § 496d), and other charges and enhancement allegations were dismissed. Defendant was sentenced to one year four months in state prison.
On April 9, 2015, defendant filed a petition for resentencing (Pen. Code, § 1170.18) requesting that his violation of Vehicle Code section "10851 [sic]" be designated a misdemeanor. The People opposed the petition on the ground that Vehicle Code section 10851 was not affected by Proposition 47. The trial court entered an order stating that the plea was to Penal Code section 496d, which does not qualify for resentencing under Proposition 47.
DISCUSSION
After briefing was completed in this case, this court issued its opinions in People v. Garness (2015) 241 Cal.App.4th 1370, and People v. Peacock, E063095, 2015 Cal.App. Lexis 1054 ___ Cal.App.4th ___, in which we held that Proposition 47 relief is not available to reduce a conviction of Penal Code section 496d to a misdemeanor and that the failure to provide such relief does not violate equal protection principles. For the reasons set forth in those opinions, we likewise reject defendant's contentions.
DISPOSITION
The order appealed from is affirmed.
RAMIREZ, P. J. and HOLLENHORST, J., concurs.
