The ruling is another forward step for criminal justice reform in California.
In 2014, California voters approved Proposition 47, known as the Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act. As part of Prop 47, some felony or “wobbler” offenses were reclassified as misdemeanors. Wobblers are those crimes that can be charged as either a felony or misdemeanor offense, based on the facts of the case and the defendant’s criminal history. Prop 47 also added a new section to the California code, allowing defendants who were previously convicted of felony offenses to petition the court to be re-sentenced or to have those convictions re-designated as misdemeanor convictions.
At the end of July, the California Supreme Court ruled on an important issue impacting many Californians who were eligible for re-sentencing under Prop 47: sentencing enhancements. Under California law, prosecutors can request additional charges that allow for extra prison time if an underlying fact or condition is met. For example, according to a criminal defense attorney San Bernardino, CA, in a drug case, a prosecutor might add a sentencing enhancement if a person possesses a certain quantity of methamphetamine or cocaine (a weight enhancement). Other sentencing enhancements include those for great bodily injury, the use of firearms, and a sentencing enhancement for involvement with a gang. Depending on the enhancement, it could add a significant amount of time to the prison sentence.
In People v. Buycks, which was decided on July 30, 2018, the California Supreme Court decided a trio of cases that all asked the same question: does Prop 47’s directive regarding re-sentenced or re-designated cases apply to sentencing enhancements? The Supreme Court held that it did. According to the Court, because Proposition 47 stated that the re-sentenced or re-designated offense “be considered a misdemeanor for all purposes,” defendants can challenge sentencing enhancements when the underlying felony crime has been re-sentenced or re-designated as a misdemeanor. This ruling applies to sentencing enhancements for violent felonies under California Penal Code 667.5 and to the enhancement for crimes committed while a defendant was on bail or released on their own recognizance.
To challenge a sentencing enhancement under Prop 47, the California Supreme Court held that persons convicted of eligible crimes can follow the re-sentencing procedure as outlined in section 1170.18 of the California Penal Code. They may also bring a petition for writ of habeas corpus, for judgements that were not final at the time that Prop 47 was not passed. A criminal defense attorney San Bernardino, CA can assist in filing these petitions. Importantly, anyone convicted of failure to appear on felony charges is not eligible for this relief.
At the Chambers Law Firm, our legal professionals stay on top of legal developments like this case so that we are ready and able to assist our clients. We strongly believe in helping our clients achieve justice, and will work with our clients to help them achieve the best possible outcome for their cases. Contact us today at 714-760-4088 or dchambers@clfca.com to schedule a free initial consultation with a criminal defense attorney San Bernardino, CA.
