People v. Donley CA5, F071524

Shawn Donley was sentenced in 2013 with four prior prison-term enhancements under Penal Code § 667.5(b), one based on a 2004 felony conviction for possession of a controlled substance (Health & Safety Code § 11377(a)).
In April 2015 the trial court granted resentencing under Proposition 47 (Pen. Code § 1170.18) and reduced the 2004 conviction from a felony to a misdemeanor.
After that reduction, Donley moved to strike the prior prison-term enhancement that had been based on the 2004 conviction; the trial court denied relief and Donley appealed.
The legal question presented was whether a prior felony that has been reduced to a misdemeanor under Prop. 47 may still support a § 667.5(b) prior-prison-term enhancement for a sentence imposed before the reduction.
The court considered statutory text, voter materials for Prop. 47, and precedent on retroactivity and prior-conviction reductions to determine voter intent and whether Prop. 47 operated retroactively to undo an enhancement already imposed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a conviction reduced to a misdemeanor under Prop. 47 can be used to support a § 667.5(b) prior-prison-term enhancement previously imposed	Prop. 47 does not retroactively eliminate already-imposed recidivist enhancements; § 667.5(b) focuses on prior service of a prison term	The reduced conviction is a misdemeanor "for all purposes" under § 1170.18(k) and therefore cannot support a prior-prison-term enhancement	Held: No retroactive relief. Because Donley served a prison term when the offense was a felony and his sentence was enhanced before the reduction, the enhancement stands

People v. Park, 56 Cal.4th 782 (Cal. 2013) (a prior conviction reduced to a misdemeanor before commission of the current offense cannot be used as a prior felony for enhancement purposes)
People v. Flores, 92 Cal.App.3d 461 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979) (statutory amendments reducing punishment and directing record destruction supported non-application of enhancements where legislative intent was clear)
People v. Tenner, 6 Cal.4th 559 (Cal. 1993) (elements and purpose of § 667.5 enhancements explained)
People v. Brown, 54 Cal.4th 314 (Cal. 2012) (statutory presumption against retroactivity unless expressly declared)