People v. Chandler CA2/6
B267338
| Cal. Ct. App. | Aug 22, 2016Background
- In 2001 Chandler was convicted of being a felon in possession of a firearm and, based on two prior serious-felony strikes, was sentenced to 25 years to life under California's Three Strikes law.
- The firearm was observed in the car near Chandler’s seat; officers described it as under the driver’s armrest with the handle readily accessible.
- Chandler filed a petition under Proposition 36 (Pen. Code § 1170.126) seeking resentencing as a second-strike offender.
- The prosecutor opposed, arguing Chandler was statutorily ineligible because he was “armed with a firearm” during the offense, an exclusion to resentencing relief.
- The trial court found Chandler ineligible, concluding the weapon was readily available and he had actual possession; the court denied the petition.
- Chandler appealed the denial arguing the armed-with-a-firearm exclusion should apply only when the firearm facilitated the commission of the offense or an additional offense; the Court of Appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the armed-with-a-firearm exclusion to Prop. 36 applies when the firearm was present and readily accessible but did not facilitate the offense | Prosecutor: exclusion applies where a firearm was available/readily accessible during commission of the offense | Chandler: exclusion should apply only if the firearm facilitated the offense or an additional offense | Court: exclusion applies based on availability/readily accessible possession; actual possession/ready access renders defendant ineligible |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Johnson, 61 Cal.4th 674 (explains Prop. 36 eligibility and resentencing framework)
- People v. Osuna, 225 Cal.App.4th 1020 (construed "armed with a firearm" as having a firearm available for use)
- People v. White, 223 Cal.App.4th 512 (held availability/ready access suffices for armed-with exclusion)
- People v. White, 243 Cal.App.4th 1354 (reaffirmed that ready accessibility increases the threat and exclusion applies)
- People v. Hicks, 231 Cal.App.4th 275 (rejected narrow construction requiring facilitation of the offense)
- People v. Littrel, 185 Cal.App.3d 699 (explains policy basis for prohibiting felons from possessing concealable firearms)