California v. Smith
Annotate this CaseDefendant Michael Smith appealed the summary denial of his Proposition 47 resentencing petition. Using the Superior Court’s standard petitioning form, Smith sought to have two felony second degree commercial burglary convictions (counts 1, 2) designated as misdemeanor shoplifting because “[t]he value of the check or property does not exceed $950.00.” The State responded, also using the standard form, by checking the box conceding Smith “is entitled to resentencing” and requesting a hearing to determine “[r]e-sentencing on Ct 2.” The State did not contest the value of the loss in count 1, but did check the box requesting a hearing because the “People do not believe count one is eligible as [the victim] is not a commercial establishment,” which is a required element of shoplifting. The superior court agreed the victim in count 1 was not a commercial establishment and denied relief, and also summarily denied Smith’s petition as to count 2 without explanation. On appeal, Smith argued the victim check exchange business was a commercial establishment and there was otherwise insufficient evidence to support the court’s denial of his petition as to counts 1 and 2. The Court of Appeal agreed, and reversed the superior court’s ruling with directions to either summarily grant his petition or hold an evidentiary hearing to resolve any material factual issues revealed by the superior court’s review of the record of conviction.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.