Filed 5 / 18 / 21 P. v. Salas CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

ALEJANDR O SALAS

,

Defendant and Appellant. 2d Crim. No. B309704 (Super. Ct. No. 2005034146 ) ( Ventura County)

In 2005, Alejandro Salas pled guilty to a charge of receiving
stolen property. (Pen. Code, § 496, subd. (a).) 1 He initially was placed on proba tion, but was later sentenced to a two

- year term in state prison. In 2020, Salas filed a postconviction motion under Proposition 47 and section 1170.18 seeking to reduce the 2005 felony conviction to a misdemeanor. He appeals the trial court’s
denial of that motion. The court found Salas ineligib le for relief

1 All statutory refere nces are to the Penal Code.2

because he has prior “ super strike ” conviction s , as set forth in
section 667 , subdivision (e)(2)(C) (iv) (hereafter “§ 667(e)(2)(C)(iv)”)

. (See People v. Zamarripa (2016) 247 Cal.App.4th 1179, 1183

- 1184 ( Zamarripa ) .) We appointed counsel to represent Salas in this appeal After an examination of the record, counsel filed an opening brief
which raises no arguable issues. We advised Salas he had 30 days within which to personally submit any content ions or issues
that he wished us to consider. He subsequently filed a 12

- page typewritten supplemental brief. Because this is an appeal from an order denying
post conviction relief, Salas is not entitled to our independent review pursuant to People v. W ende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. ( People
v. Serrano (2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 496, 501; People v. Cole (2020) 52 Cal.App.5th 1023, review granted Oc t. 14, 2020, S264278.) We do, however, consider the issues raised in Salas’s supplemental brief.
Salas was convicte d of second degree murder and three attempted m urders in case No. 2008006111. (§§ 187, subd. (a), 189; 664/1 87, subd. (a).) We affirmed those convictions. ( People
v. Hernandez et al. (June 24, 2013, B229363) [nonpub. o pn.].)
Salas ’s murder conviction w as later vacated pursuant to section 1170.95, but we affirmed the trial co urt’s order denying his petition for resentencing on the attempted murder convictions. ( People v. Salas (Jan. 4, 2021, B301365 ) [nonpub. opn.].) Section 1170.18, which was enacte d as part of Proposition 47, allows a defendant convicted of certain felony drug and theft
offenses to petition the trial court to recall the felony sentence
and to resentence him or her to a misdemeanor. (§ 1170.18, subd. (a).) The applicable offenses i nclude receiving stolen property if3

the value of the property did not exceed $950. (§ § 1170.18, subds. (a) & (b), 496, subd. (a).)
Section 1170.18 does not apply , however, “ to a person who
has one or more prior convictions for an offense specified in

c lause (iv) of subparagraph (C) of paragraph (2) of subdivision (e) of Section 667 or for an offense requiring registration pursuant to

s ubdivision (c) of Section 290.” (§ 1170.18, subd. (i).) Among the disqualifying offenses is “[a]ny homicide offense, i ncluding any attempted homicide offense , defined in Section s 187 to 191.5, inclusive.” (§ 667(e)(2)(C)(iv)( IV), italics added.) Salas contends the trial court erred by finding he is disqualified from relief under Proposition 47 and section 1170.18.
It is undisputed , however, that appellant suffered three “super strike” convictions for attempted murder before seeking reclassification of his 2005 felony conviction

. (See Zamarripa

, supra , 247 Cal.App.4th at p. 1183.) None of appellant’s
arguments can ove rcome the fact that the se prior convictions render him ineligible for the requested relief. ( Id

. , at pp. 1183

- 1184; see People v. Hatt (2018) 20 Cal.App.5th 321, 328

- 329.) The appeal is dismissed.

PERREN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P.J. Y EGAN

, J.4 Nancy Ayers, Judge Supe ri or Court Co unty of Ventura

______________________________

Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for D efendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.