People v. Johnson, 8 Cal. App. 5th 111

In Jan 2014 Steven Jay Johnson stole merchandise valued at $1,225; in Feb 2014 he pled no contest to felony grand theft and admitted three prior prison-term enhancements under Pen. Code § 667.5(b), including a 2010 conviction for three counts of second-degree commercial burglary. He was sentenced in Mar 2014 to a five-year term (middle term plus two one-year priors).
Proposition 47 (effective Nov 5, 2014) reduced certain theft offenses (including some commercial burglaries) to misdemeanors and created § 1170.18, allowing completed-felony convictions that would have been misdemeanors under Prop 47 to be reclassified.
Johnson sought relief under Prop 47: he requested reclassification of his 2010 burglary convictions to misdemeanors and asked the court to strike the § 667.5(b) prior-prison-term enhancements in his 2014 sentence that were based on those 2010 convictions.
The trial court agreed Johnson was eligible for reclassification of the 2010 convictions but denied relief from the § 667.5(b) enhancements, concluding reduction to misdemeanors after sentencing does not negate prior-term enhancements already imposed.
The Court of Appeal affirmed: it directed the trial court to formally designate the 2010 convictions as misdemeanors under § 1170.18 but held the § 667.5(b) enhancements in the current (pre-reclassification) sentence remain valid because Prop 47 did not clearly express an intent to apply retroactively to eliminate prior-term enhancements.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 667.5(b) one-year prior-prison-term enhancements must be stricken from a sentence imposed before the underlying felony was reclassified to a misdemeanor under Prop 47	The People argued the enhancements remain because they punish the status of having served prior prison terms and Prop 47 did not clearly intend to eliminate such collateral recidivist enhancements retroactively	Johnson argued Prop 47’s § 1170.18(k) makes reclassified felonies misdemeanors "for all purposes," so the underlying felonies can no longer support § 667.5(b) enhancements, requiring resentencing	The court held enhancements remain: Prop 47 did not clearly express retroactive intent to erase prior-prison-term enhancements already imposed; however the 2010 convictions must be formally redesignated as misdemeanors

People v. Park, 56 Cal.4th 782 (California Supreme Court 2013) (prior reduction to misdemeanor before commission of new offense removes conviction from qualifying as a prior felony for enhancement)
In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (California 1965) (rule that ameliorative criminal laws apply retroactively to nonfinal judgments absent contrary intent)
People v. Brown, 54 Cal.4th 314 (California 2012) (presumption against retroactivity and interplay with Estrada for ameliorative changes)
People v. Flores, 92 Cal.App.3d 461 (California Ct. App. 1979) (statutory reclassification of offense to misdemeanor may prevent its use as a prior for enhancement when clear legislative intent exists)
People v. Tenner, 6 Cal.4th 559 (California 1993) (elements required to impose § 667.5(b) prior-prison-term enhancement)