54 Cal.App.5th 727
Cal. Ct. App.2020Background
- In 2010 D.C. pled no contest to felony possession of a controlled substance; the court suspended imposition of judgment and placed him on probation under Proposition 36 (Pen. Code §1210.1).
- D.C. completed court‑ordered drug treatment and probation; the court set aside the conviction, entered a plea of not guilty, and dismissed the charge pursuant to §1210.1(e)(1), which states the arrest and conviction are "deemed never to have occurred" for many purposes.
- In 2018 D.C. petitioned under Penal Code §851.91 (enacted by Senate Bill 393) to have his 2010 arrest records sealed on the ground the arrest did not result in a conviction.
- The trial court denied the petition, concluding persons who completed Proposition 36 probation were ineligible for relief under §851.91.
- On appeal the issue was whether a conviction that was later set aside and "deemed never to have occurred" under §1210.1(e)(1) qualifies as an arrest that "did not result in a conviction" for purposes of §851.91.
Issues
| Issue | People’s Argument | D.C.’s Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a Prop 36 dismissal that "deems" an arrest and conviction never to have occurred makes the arrestee eligible under §851.91 as someone whose arrest "did not result in a conviction." | §851.91 applies only to arrests that never produced a conviction; D.C. pleaded no contest and thus was convicted; §1210.1’s limited "deeming" does not convert a conviction into a true never‑conviction for §851.91 purposes. | §1210.1(e)(1) expressly provides the arrest and conviction are "deemed never to have occurred" after successful completion, so D.C. meets §851.91(a)(1)(B)(i) (no conviction occurred; charge dismissed; may not be refiled). | Affirmed. A plea of guilty/no contest is a conviction; although §1210.1 limits many consequences, it does not render the earlier conviction equivalent to someone never convicted for §851.91 sealing relief, so D.C. is ineligible. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Jimenez, 9 Cal.5th 53 (statutory interpretation and interaction of initiative and legislative schemes)
- People v. Canty, 32 Cal.4th 1266 (scope of Proposition 36 treatment and probation requirements)
- People v. Wallace, 33 Cal.4th 738 (a guilty or no contest plea is equivalent to a conviction)
- People v. E.B., 51 Cal.App.5th 47 (a set‑aside/dismissal under a statutory provision does not necessarily obliterate the conviction for purposes of record‑sealing statutes)
- People v. Sharman, 17 Cal.App.3d 550 (public access to records is not a "penalty or disability" relieved by a dismissal)