P v. Carrea (4th Dist., Div.1) Another Opinion Holding a Subsequent 1170.18 Grant is of no Effect as to Prior 667.5(b) Enhancements

This is an opinion agreeing with P v. Ruff and P v. Valenzuela that an 1170.18 misdemeanor reduction has no effect upon a previously imposed prison prior under 667.5(b).

Mr. Carrea was convicted of a felony 484/459 in 2004 for which he served a prison term.  In 2012, Carrea was convicted of felony domestic violence, PC 273.5(a).  He was sentenced to prison on the 273.5(a) and one year was added under PC 667.5(b) for his 2004 prison term.

In 2015, Carrea petitioned for, and was granted, a misdemeanor reduction for his 484/459 via PC 1170.18.  His reduction in hand, Carrea now seeks to reduce his 2012 sentence by one year on the theory that since his 2004 484/459 conviction is now a misdemeanor, it cannot legally remain the basis for a one-year 667.5(b) enhancement.

The Fourth District panel disagrees.  While following the opinions in Ruff and Valenzuela, the panel adds two wrinkles, one valid and one dubious.

The valid wrinkle is the (obvious, but previously unrecognized) notion that PC 1170.18 only speaks to resentencing for convictions which would have been misdemeanors if committed after November 5, 2014.  Since Carrea's conviction is for PC 273.5(a), which was not made a misdemeanor by Proposition 47, the procedural vehicle of 1170.18 provides no relief.  It is difficult to argue with this point.

The dubious wrinkle is that the panel states that Proposition 47's language is unambiguous that it does not apply to prior prison terms.  This is stretching it.  The language that once a conviction is reduced to a misdemeanor it is a "misdemeanor for all purposes" does not exclude the possibility that "for all purposes" may include prior prison terms.  But for this piffle, the opinion is reasonably convincing.