Robert
J. Beles Bar No. 41993
1
Kaiser Plaza, Suite 1750
Tel
No. (510) 836-0100
Fax. No. (510) 832-3690
Demetrius Costy
Attorney for Defendant
SUPERIOR COURT OF
CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
RENE
C. DAVIDSON COURTHOUSE
People of the State of California, Plaintiff, vs. Jane Doe, Defendant. |
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) |
No. H-13919 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES |
Penal Code section 17(b) allows this
court to reduce a felony conviction to a misdemeanor if defendant is
granted felony probation and the defendant requests that the court declare the
conviction a misdemeanor. The
court can declare the conviction a misdemeanor at some time after imposing a
sentence.
The
court record shows that defendant was convicted of two counts of Health and
Safety Code Section 11379 with no subparts mentioned, following her
guilty plea. Subpart (a) of the
section is a straight felony; subpart (b) is a “wobbler” (crime punishable as a
felony or misdemeanor). Since
the conviction does not specify a subpart, the court should construe the
conviction in defendant's favor and treat it as a conviction under subpart (b).
With
respect to crimes punishable either as a felony or a misdemeanor, there is no
legislative preference for either punishment. As the Supreme Court stated in Re Anderson (1968) 69 Cal 2d
613, 626, 73 Cal Rptr 21, 447 P2d 117:
“The fact that a crime punishable as a felony or a misdemeanor is regarded as a felony unless and until the trial court imposes a misdemeanor sentence does not show that the Legislature prefers a felony sentence to be imposed by the trial court....
A
defendant's potential for rehabilitation is but one of several factors the
trial court considers in determining whether to sentence a defendant to jail or
to state prison. The trial court
also considers matters such as the community's need for protection, and no
specific standard controls the exercise of the trial court's discretion.”
Also,
as this court is no doubt aware, Penal Code section 1203.4 requires the court
to dismiss the case if a defendant, following conviction for a felony, was
placed on probation, has successfully completed the terms of probation, is not
serving a sentence, is not on probation, and is not charged with any new
offense. (See People v Hawley (1991) 228 Cal.App.3d 247.) However, a section 1203.4 dismissal
does not get rid of the felony conviction for all purposes. The defendant must still disclose the
conviction in response to any direct question contained in any questionnaire or
application for public office.
Defendant has successfully completed
probation and has not been arrested for any other offense. In fact, this is the only adult
criminal conviction she has.
Defendant is now working as a real estate property management. She has applied for firefighting
positions in about 20 California communities over the past two years. As part of the application process, she
has had to disclose her felony conviction. She has a two-year college degree, passed her examinations
for the positions, but has never been hired. She has heard from friends in the various fire departments
that she is being passed over for hiring because of her felony conviction.
Defendant
would prefer that this court reduce her felony conviction to a misdemeanor,
however, it would also be helpful to expunge the felony conviction under
section 1203.4 if it cannot be reduced to a misdemeanor. She could then inform potential
employers that the court has expunged the conviction.
Dated: Oakland, California,
Attorney
for Defendant