P v. Smith (4th Dist., Div.2) Delphic Denial of PC 1170.18 Reversed and Remanded

In January of 2011, Mr. Smith pleaded guilty to two counts of commercial burglary, involving a check cashing business and a Staples store, and one count of passing counterfeit bills, PC 476.  He admitted one prior strike conviction and six prior prison terms.  At sentencing, Smith received 13 year and 4 months in the state prison.

In 2014, two weeks after California's voters passed Proposition 47, Smith petitioned to reduce his three convictions to misdemeanors via PC 1170.18.  He used a form created by the local court.  The State filed a strange response stating that [1] Smith was eligible for the relief requested, and [2] requesting a hearing on whether a check cashing business is a commercial establishment.  

The trial court, sans a hearing, denied Smith's petition in its entirety.  The minute order from the denial stated only that PC 476 was not a qualifying offense.  The order said nothing about why relief was denied as to the burglary counts. Smith appealed as to these two commercial burglary counts.

The Fourth District reverses and remands the matter for the trial court to either grant the petition as to the burglary counts, or in the alternative, hold a hearing on whether the amounts at issue exceeded 950 dollars.

As to the check cashing count, since the State, in its request for a hearing, appeared to contest that such a business qualifies as a "commercial establishment", the panel confronts this issue.  It determines a check cashing business is a "commercial establishment" as it is a business engaged in the exchange of goods and services.  Finding the trial court could not have denied Smith's petition on this ground, the panel next entertains the State's assertion that Smith did not carry his burden of showing the amounts did not exceed 950 dollars.

The panel rejects this because in responding to Smith's petition asserting the amounts were less than 950 dollars, the State conceded that he was "eligible for the relief requested", a statement which necessarily includes a concession the amounts were eligible.  Since a court is not required to accept such a concession, the panel remands the matter for the trial court to determine whether there is a material dispute of the amounts involved and, if there is, hold a hearing.  

In a footnote, the panel also hints that Smith may wish to file another petition as to the PC 476 count as the Court of Appeal has held this crime may be eligible for PC 1170.18 relief.