People v. Sanders, 22 Cal. App. 5th 397

In 2014 Misha Yvanne Sanders pleaded guilty to two counts of commercial burglary (Pen. Code § 459) and two counts of identity theft (Pen. Code § 530.5(a)); she was sentenced to a determinate term of 3 years 8 months.
In 2017 Sanders petitioned under Proposition 47 (§ 1170.18) to reclassify felonies as misdemeanors and to dismiss the identity-theft counts; the trial court granted reclassification of the burglary counts as shoplifting (§ 459.5) but denied relief as to § 530.5 counts.
Offense facts (uncontested): Sanders found another person’s credit card, used it to buy cigarettes and a drink at 7-Eleven and to obtain cash at Burger King; total charges were $174.61.
Sanders argued that because the merchant losses were under $950 and the burglaries were recast as shoplifting, her § 530.5 convictions should be treated as thefts subject to Proposition 47’s $950 petty-theft threshold and thus reduced/dismissed.
The court concluded § 530.5(a) is a non‑theft offense (in the false personation chapter), theft is not an element, and the cardholder’s harm is misuse of identity rather than theft of the cardholder’s property.
The trial court’s denial to reclassify the § 530.5 counts was affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 530.5(a) convictions qualify as "theft" subject to Prop. 47 (§ 490.2) $950 threshold	Sanders: Using another’s identity to obtain < $950 in property makes § 530.5 a theft offense and eligible for reclassification	State: § 530.5 is a false personation/identity‑use offense, not a theft; theft victims were the merchants, not the cardholder; § 530.5 is not listed in § 1170.18	Court: § 530.5(a) is not a theft offense and is not reclassifiable under § 1170.18/Prop. 47; trial court affirmed

People v. Page, 3 Cal.5th 1175 (2017) (Prop. 47 applies to nonlisted statutes when the offense is a theft form, e.g., Vehicle Code § 10851 theft form)
People v. Romanowski, 2 Cal.5th 903 (2017) (theft of an access card under § 484e is a form of grand theft subject to § 490.2)
People v. Barba, 211 Cal.App.4th 214 (2012) (statutory interpretation principles and independent review of scope of offenses)
People v. Valenzuela, 205 Cal.App.4th 800 (2012) (identity‑theft statutes protect harms beyond simply the value of property obtained)
People v. Truong, 10 Cal.App.5th 551 (2017) (observes Legislature placed § 530.5 in false personation chapter, not the theft chapter)