P. v. Durbin CA4/2
Defendant Brian Charles Dubrin appeals the denial of his petition for recall of his “three strikes” sentence pursuant to Proposition 36. (Pen. Code, § 1170.126.) In his opening brief, he argues that the Proposition 47 definition of unreasonable danger applies to Proposition 36. However, in his reply brief, he concedes that the California Supreme Court recently held that Proposition 47’s definition of dangerousness does not apply to Proposition 36 petitions. (People v. Valencia (2017) 3 Cal.5th 347.) Thus, his sole contention on appeal is that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that resentencing him would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety under section 1170.126, subdivision (f). We dismiss the appeal following appellant’s notice of abandonment and request for dismissal.
Comments on P. v. Durbin CA4/2