Opinion
C086192
12-18-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. TROY TEE TAYLOR, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. 62-125667)
Defendant Troy Tee Taylor challenges the imposition of a three-year enhancement under Health and Safety Code section 11370.2, subdivision (c), based on a prior conviction for possession of cocaine for sale. The enhancement was abolished by Senate Bill No. 180 (Stats. 2017, ch. 677, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 2018), and the parties agree that the change applies to defendant's conviction, which is not yet final. We will modify the judgment to strike the enhancement and otherwise affirm.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Health and Safety Code. --------
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND
Sacramento County Case No. 14F05572 (the Sacramento Case)
In March 2015 a jury found defendant guilty of possession of methamphetamine for sale in the Sacramento case. (§ 11378.) In May 2015 defendant admitted a prior strike (Pen. Code, § 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and one prior prison term (id., § 667.5, subd. (b)), and the trial court sustained an allegation that defendant had a prior conviction for possession of cocaine for sale (§ 11370.2, subd. (c)). The section 11370.2, subdivision (c) enhancement was based on defendant's 2006 conviction in Solano County case No. FCR227199 for violating section 11351.
In May 2015 the trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for an aggregate term of 10 years, as follows: three years for the possession for sale charge doubled to six years due to the prior strike, three years consecutive for the prior possession for sale conviction, and one year for the prior prison term.
We affirmed. (People v. Taylor (Mar. 13, 2017, C079420) [nonpub. opn.].)
Placer County Case No. 62-125667 (the Placer Case)
In September 2017, defendant pleaded no contest in the Placer case to attempted second degree commercial burglary (Pen. Code, §§ 459, 664) and admitted having a prior strike (id., § 667, subds. (b)-(i)). The trial court sentenced defendant to state prison for an aggregate term of 10 years eight months, as follows: (1) in the Sacramento case, the same 10-year sentence detailed above (see id., § 1170.1, subd. (a); California Rules of Court, rule 4.452); and (2) in the Placer case, four months (one-third the midterm) doubled to eight months due to the strike. Defendant appealed.
DISCUSSION
Former section 11370.2 provided for sentence enhancements for defendants with prior convictions for certain drug crimes. Senate Bill No. 180, which went into effect January 1, 2018, abolished the enhancement for prior convictions under section 11351. (Stats. 2017, ch. 677, § 1.) As the parties note, the change applies retroactively to benefit defendant. (See People v. Rossi (1976) 18 Cal.3d 295, 299-301.) We agree with the parties that the enhancement, on appeal from its September 2017 re-imposition, must be stricken.
DISPOSITION
The enhancement imposed under section 11370.2 in the Sacramento case is stricken. The trial court is directed to prepare an amended abstract of judgment and to forward a certified copy to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. The judgment is otherwise affirmed.
/s/_________
Duarte, J. We concur: /s/_________
Butz, Acting P. J. /s/_________
Mauro, J.