P. v. Cordova CA6
Defendant Johnny Melendez Cordova petitioned for resentencing under the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (enacted by Proposition 36), and the trial court denied him relief on the ground that resentencing would pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety. A different panel of this court reversed, concluding the matter should be remanded for the trial court to apply the definition of unreasonable risk of danger contained in the Safe Neighborhood and Schools Act (enacted by Proposition 47 in 2014). (People v. Cordova (2016) 248 Cal.App.4th 543, 547 (Premo, J., dissenting), review granted on August 31, 2016, S236179, and cause transferred to Court of Appeal, Sixth Appellate District, with directions.) After granting review, the Supreme Court decided People v. Valencia (2017) 3 Cal.5th 347, 356, which held that the Proposition 47 definition of unreasonable risk of danger does not apply to Proposition 36 resentencing proceedings.
Comments on P. v. Cordova CA6