13 Cal. App. 5th 745
Cal. Ct. App. 5th2017Background
- In 2006 Casillas pled nolo contendere to felony possession of a controlled substance (Cal. Health & Safety Code §11377) and admitted a prior prison term; he was sentenced to three years and completed the term.
- In 2013 a jury convicted Casillas of attempted murder and several related violent offenses; the jury found true a firearm enhancement and he received an aggregate 29-year sentence.
- Proposition 47 (effective Nov 5, 2014) reclassified certain drug offenses (including §11377) from wobblers/felonies to misdemeanors and added Penal Code §1170.18, which permits postconviction petitioning to reduce qualifying felonies to misdemeanors.
- Section 1170.18(i) disqualifies any person who "has one or more prior convictions" for specified "super strike" offenses (Pen. Code §667, subd. (e)(2)(C)(iv)) from relief under the section.
- Casillas filed a §1170.18(f) petition in 2015 to redesignate his 2006 felony as a misdemeanor; the trial court denied the petition because of his 2013 attempted murder conviction and Casillas appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether "prior conviction" in §1170.18(i) means a disqualifying conviction occurring before the offense sought to be reclassified, or any time before the court rules on the petition | AG: "Prior" means any disqualifying conviction that occurs before the trial court rules on the petition | Casillas: "Prior" should mean only convictions that predate the offense being reclassified (i.e., before 2006) | The court held "prior conviction" means any qualifying conviction that precedes the court's ruling on the petition; a 2013 super strike conviction disqualifies a 2015 petition to reclassify a 2006 conviction. |
| Whether a nonfinal conviction (appeal pending) qualifies as a "conviction" under §1170.18(i) | AG: A conviction exists upon verdict or plea; a nonfinal conviction still disqualifies petitioners | Casillas: His 2013 conviction was not final on appeal, so it should not be treated as a disqualifying conviction | The court held "conviction" has its ordinary legal meaning (verdict or plea) and need not be final; a plea or jury verdict suffices to disqualify. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Walker, 5 Cal.App.5th 872 (court relied on Walker for using ballot materials to ascertain voter intent regarding §1170.18)
- People v. Montgomery, 247 Cal.App.4th 1385 (cited for interpretation context and for contrasting approaches to "prior" in Prop. 47)
- People v. Zamarripa, 247 Cal.App.4th 1179 (cited for reasoning that §1170.18's disqualification is not limited to convictions preceding the offense sought to be reclassified)
- People v. Spiller, 2 Cal.App.5th 1014 (distinguished: Spiller construed "prior" under Prop. 36 as limited to convictions before the current sentence-triggering offense)
- People v. Castello, 65 Cal.App.4th 1242 (used for definition and ordinary meaning of "conviction")
- People v. Rizo, 22 Cal.4th 681 (cited for statutory construction rules regarding ordinary meaning of terms)