People v. Ricci

227 Cal. Rptr. 3d 91, 18 Cal. App. 5th 526
CourtCalifornia Court of Appeal, 5th District
DecidedDecember 14, 2017
DocketA151291
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 227 Cal. Rptr. 3d 91 (People v. Ricci) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering California Court of Appeal, 5th District primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
People v. Ricci, 227 Cal. Rptr. 3d 91, 18 Cal. App. 5th 526 (Cal. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

NEEDHAM, J.

*528This appeal presents the following issue: May a defendant who has suffered both felony and misdemeanor convictions in the same case seek the dismissal of the misdemeanor *92convictions under section 1203.4a?1 The Attorney General concedes a felony conviction does not disqualify a defendant from seeking relief as to misdemeanor convictions in the same case. Finding the concession to be appropriate, we reverse the trial court's order denying appellant's petitions for dismissal and direct the court to consider those petitions on their merits.

I. BACKGROUND

"[S]ection 1203.4 permits convicted felons or misdemeanants who have been granted probation to petition the court for release from the penalties and disabilities resulting from the conviction after their probationary period has terminated. ... [¶] ... [S]ection 1203.4a provides similar relief for persons convicted of misdemeanors and not granted probation." ( People v. Mendez (1991) 234 Cal.App.3d 1773, 1778, 286 Cal.Rptr. 216.) The relief afforded by these provisions is required when specified conditions are met. ( People v. McLernon (2009) 174 Cal.App.4th 569, 574-575, 94 Cal.Rptr.3d 570 ; § 1203.4, subd. (a)(1), § 1203.4a, subd. (b).) In other situations, relief is available in the court's discretion in the interests of justice. (Ibid .)2

*529In 1989, in case number MCR97449, appellant was placed on probation after being convicted of one misdemeanor count of evading a peace officer under Vehicle Code section 2800.1. In 1996, in case number *93SCR22536, appellant was convicted after a jury trial of one felony count of criminal threats under section 422 and three misdemeanor counts: child abuse under section 273a, subdivision (b), vandalism under section 594, subdivision (a), and being under the influence of a controlled substance under Health and Safety Code section 11550, subdivision (a). He was denied probation and sentenced to prison.

In 2016, appellant filed amended petitions for dismissal of his misdemeanor convictions in case numbers MCR97449 and SCR22536. The petition in case number MCR97449 alleged appellant had suffered a misdemeanor conviction for evading a peace officer, had been granted probation, and was entitled to relief in the interests of justice under section 1203.4. The petition in case number SCR22536 alleged appellant had been convicted of three misdemeanors, had not been placed on probation, and was entitled to relief in the interests of justice under section 1203.4a. Because probation had not been granted in case number SCR22536, and because section 1203.4a applied only to misdemeanors, the petition in case number SCR22536 sought dismissal only of the misdemeanor counts in that case and did not seek any relief with respect to the felony count.3

The trial court issued a written order denying the petition in case number SCR22536. It concluded the relief authorized by section 1203.4a was not available when a defendant had been convicted of both misdemeanors and a felony, noting (1) the title of section 1203.4a was "Rehabilitation of Misdemeanants " (italics added);4 and (2) the remedy under section 1203.4a called for the dismissal of the accusatory pleading, and an accusatory pleading could *530not be dismissed in its entirety in cases where one or more felony counts remained. Although the court's written order included case number MCR97449 in its caption, the court did not purport to rule on the section 1203.4 petition for dismissal filed in that case.

II. DISCUSSION

The parties agree the trial court had the authority to rule on the merits of the petition under section 1203.4a in case number SCR22536, notwithstanding that appellant was convicted of a felony count in addition to the three misdemeanor counts for which relief was sought. Section 1203.4a, subdivision (a), applies to "[e]very defendant convicted of a misdemeanor and not granted probation" who meets certain criteria. Because appellant was convicted of misdemeanors in case number SCR22536 and was not granted probation, section 1203.4a applies to those charges by its plain terms. " 'If the language of the statute is not ambiguous, the plain meaning controls [.]' " ( *94In re Jennings (2004) 34 Cal.4th 254, 263, 17 Cal.Rptr.3d 645, 95 P.3d 906.) The title of section 1203.4 quoted in the trial court order, which referred to "misdemeanants," does not change the plain meaning of the statute itself. " 'Title or chapter headings are unofficial and do not alter the explicit scope, meaning or intent of a statute.' " ( People v. Wheeler (1992) 4 Cal.4th 284, 293-294, 14 Cal.Rptr.2d 418, 841 P.2d 938 ; see also In re Gina S. (2005) 133 Cal.App.4th 1074, 1083, fn. 9, 35 Cal.Rptr.3d 277.)

Our interpretation of section 1203.4a is supported by People v. Mgebrov (2008) 166 Cal.App.4th 579, 582, 82 Cal.Rptr.3d 778 ( Mgebrov ), in which the court affirmed an order granting relief under related section 1203.4 as to two of the three felony counts for which probation had been granted, even though the third conviction was a violation section 288, which was explicitly excluded from the provisions of section 1203.4.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

People v. Stake CA4/2
California Court of Appeal, 2022

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
227 Cal. Rptr. 3d 91, 18 Cal. App. 5th 526, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-ricci-calctapp5d-2017.