California v. Abarca
Annotate this CaseThe State appealed the superior court’s order granting defendant Willie Abarca Jr.’s Proposition 47 resentencing petition. Abarca pled guilty to one felony count of second degree burglary based on his attempt to pass a forged check for $300 at a bank. After voters passed Proposition 47, Abarca sought to have his felony conviction redesignated as the newly created misdemeanor of shoplifting, entering an open commercial establishment with intent to commit larceny of $950 or less. The State contended Abarca’s offense did not constitute shoplifting because banks are not commercial establishments. The superior court concluded banks were commercial establishments, granted Abarca’s petition, and resentenced him. The State raised three issues on appeal: (1) the superior court erred in reaching the merits because Abarca did not carry his initial burden by attaching evidence to his petition; (2) the superior court erred in determining a bank was a commercial establishment; and (3) the superior court erred because Abarca’s underlying conduct could have been punished as felony burglary even after Proposition 47, because Abarca’s act of passing a forged check constituted identity theft. The Court of Appeal disagreed with each asserted error and affirmed.
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.