People v. Norman CA5, F071340

Defendant Garland Terrell Norman, Jr. pleaded no contest in 2014 to receiving stolen property and second-degree burglary in separate cases; each judgment included one-year prior prison term enhancements under Penal Code § 667.5(b).
In March 2015 the trial court granted Norman’s Proposition 47 (§ 1170.18) petitions, reducing a 2014 receiving-stolen-property conviction and an earlier 2007 drug conviction (which had supported a prior-prison-term enhancement) to misdemeanors.
Norman moved to strike a prior prison term enhancement that had been based on the 2007 conviction once it was reduced under Proposition 47; the trial court denied relief and resentenced him with the enhancements intact.
Norman appealed, arguing that a conviction reduced to a misdemeanor under § 1170.18(k) is "a misdemeanor for all purposes" and therefore cannot support a § 667.5(b) prior prison term enhancement for his already-imposed sentence.
The Court of Appeal examined whether Proposition 47 operates retroactively to eliminate enhancements applied to sentences imposed before the reduction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether a felony reduced to a misdemeanor under Prop. 47 (§ 1170.18) may be used to support a prior prison-term enhancement imposed before the reduction	The People argued the enhancement remains valid because it punished recidivism based on the fact the defendant served a prior prison term when the offense was a felony	Norman argued § 1170.18(k) makes the reduced conviction a misdemeanor "for all purposes," so it can no longer serve as a prior felony/prior prison-term basis for § 667.5(b)	The court held the enhancement remains valid: Prop. 47’s resentencing does not retroactively eliminate prior-prison-term enhancements already imposed because voters did not clearly intend to reach such collateral consequences

People v. Park, 56 Cal.4th 782 (California 2013) (prior reduction to misdemeanor before commission of new offense prevents use as enhancement; distinguishes timing issue)
In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (California 1965) (rule that ameliorative criminal statutes apply to nonfinal judgments unless intent otherwise)
People v. Flores, 92 Cal.App.3d 461 (Cal. Ct. App. 1979) (amendment reducing offense to misdemeanor applied to preclude enhancement where legislative intent and ancillary statutes supported retroactivity)
People v. Tenner, 6 Cal.4th 559 (California 1993) (elements and purpose of § 667.5(b) prior prison-term enhancement)
People v. Brown, 54 Cal.4th 314 (California 2012) (presumption of prospective operation for statutes absent clear retroactive intent)
People v. Hajek & Vo, 58 Cal.4th 1144 (California 2014) (clarifies narrow application of Estrada retroactivity presumption)