Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Morales

Supreme Court of California

June 16, 2016

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
JOSUE VARGAS MORALES, Defendant and Appellant.

         Superior Court Orange County, Christopher Evans, Nos. 13WF3934, Ct.App. 4/3 G051142 Temporary Judge

Page 400

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 401

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 402

         COUNSEL

         Christian C. Buckley, under appointment by the Supreme Court, for Defendant and Appellant.

         Stephen P. Lipson, Public Defender (Ventura) and Michael C. McMahon, Chief Deputy Public Defender, for California Public Defenders Association and Public Defender of Ventura County as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant.

         Kamala D. Harris, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Joshua A. Klein, Deputy State Solicitor General, Charles C. Ragland, Samuel Siegel,

Page 403

Marvin E. Mizell, Arlene A. Sevidal and Sean M. Rodriquez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

         OPINION

         Chin, J.

         Proposition 47, an initiative measure the electorate passed in November 2014, reduced certain drug-related and property crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. The measure also provided that, under certain circumstances, a person who had received a felony sentence for one of the reduced crimes could be resentenced and receive a misdemeanor sentence. A person so resentenced is entitled to credit for time already served. Often the credit for time served will exceed the new sentence, thus entitling the person to immediate release from custody.

         Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (d), part of the same initiative measure, provides that a person who has been resentenced under the measure and given credit for time served “shall be subject to parole for one year following completion of his or her sentence, unless the court, in its discretion, as part of its resentencing order, releases the person from parole.”[1] We must decide whether excess credit for time served can be credited against this parole period, which could shorten it or reduce it to no parole at all.

         We conclude that credit for time served does not reduce the parole period. When it voted on Proposition 47, the electorate was informed, and it intended, that a person who benefitted from the new legislation by receiving a reduced sentence would be placed on parole for one year after completion of the reduced sentence, subject to the court’s discretion to release the person from that parole.

         I. ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.