People v. Pinedo, F078442

Background:

Pete Pinedo was arrested after a probation search and convicted of: felon in possession of a firearm (§ 29800), possession of ammunition (§ 30305), being under the influence of a controlled substance (Health & Safety § 11550, misdemeanor), and possession of drug paraphernalia (§ 11364, misdemeanor).
At sentencing (Nov. 8, 2018) the court imposed the upper term 3 years on the firearm count plus a 1-year prior prison-term enhancement (total determinate term 4 years), stayed a concurrent 3-year sentence on the ammunition count, and imposed various fines, fees, and a narcotics-offender registration requirement (former Health & Safety § 11590).
Defendant appealed, raising four claims: independent review of Pitchess proceedings regarding Deputy Probation Officer Ortiz’s personnel file; relief from narcotics registration under Assembly Bill No. 1261 as retroactive under In re Estrada; striking the prior-prison-term enhancement under Senate Bill No. 136; and relief/remand to address ability to pay fines/fees under People v. Dueñas.
The People conceded the prior-prison-term claim and did not oppose independent Pitchess review, but opposed retroactive relief from the narcotics-registration requirement and disputed the Dueñas-based ability-to-pay relief.
The Court conducted an independent Pitchess review, rejected any discovery obligation, applied Estrada to strike the narcotics registration and the prior enhancement, and remanded for a limited ability-to-pay hearing on fines/fees.

Issues:

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
1) Pitchess in-camera review and sufficiency of record	People agreed to independent review and maintained the trial court properly followed Mooc and found no discoverable material	Pinedo requested independent appellate review and contended the trial court may have erred or failed to make an adequate record	Court independently reviewed files, found proper Mooc procedure and no abuse of discretion; no discoverable information disclosed
2) Narcotics-offender registration (AB 1261) — retroactivity under Estrada	People argued registration is not "punishment" and repeal should be read prospectively; legislative history lacks clear retroactivity language	Pinedo argued AB 1261 is ameliorative, repeals the registration obligation, and under Estrada applies retroactively to convictions not yet final	Court applied Estrada, held repeal is ameliorative and retroactive, struck the narcotics registration and ordered amended abstract
3) Prior prison-term enhancement (SB 136) — retroactivity under Estrada	People conceded SB 136 applies retroactively and the enhancement must be stricken	Pinedo argued the amendment limits prior-term enhancements and applies to his not-final conviction	Court accepted concession, struck the one-year prior-prison-term enhancement
4) Ability to pay fines/fees (Dueñas) — remand for hearing	People argued some claims forfeited and some fines were mandatory under then-existing law	Pinedo sought remand per Dueñas to allow trial court to consider inability to pay and to stay/strike certain fines/fees	Court declined to find forfeiture given Dueñas was a significant post-sentencing development; remanded for a limited ability-to-pay hearing and record-making

Key Cases Cited

Pitchess v. Superior Court, 11 Cal.3d 531 (discovery of peace officer personnel records)
People v. Mooc, 26 Cal.4th 1216 (procedural requirements for in-camera Pitchess hearings)
In re Estrada, 63 Cal.2d 740 (presumption that ameliorative criminal-law changes apply to nonfinal judgments)
People v. Dueñas, 30 Cal.App.5th 1157 (ability-to-pay analysis for fines and fees)
People v. Montes, 59 Cal.App.5th 1107 (remand appropriate to develop Dueñas-based record)
People v. Frahs, 9 Cal.5th 618 (retroactivity canon and assessment of ameliorative statutes)
People v. Esquivel, 11 Cal.5th 671 (Estrada presumption applies broadly to ameliorative changes)
In re Luisa Z., 78 Cal.App.4th 978 (context on narcotics-registration consequences and regulatory nature)
People v. Collins, 21 Cal.3d 208 (effect of repeal: obliteration of statute and retroactivity principles)
People v. Rossi, 18 Cal.3d 295 (discussion of repeal and retroactivity principles)