People v. Ruiz

Filed 12/30/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, D076580 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. PLBC8803) BRYANT RUIZ, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kathleen M. Lewis, Judge. Reversed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Melissa Mandel and Stephanie H. Chow, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. I INTRODUCTION Bryant Ruiz appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss a petition to revoke parole filed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) for lack of jurisdiction. Even though the parties stipulated Ruiz was not convicted of a serious felony and should have been placed on post-release community supervision

Filed 12/30/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION ONE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THE PEOPLE, D076580 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Super. Ct. No. PLBC8803) BRYANT RUIZ, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Kathleen M. Lewis, Judge. Reversed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Melissa Mandel and Stephanie H. Chow, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. I INTRODUCTION Bryant Ruiz appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to dismiss a petition to revoke parole filed by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) for lack of jurisdiction. Even though the parties stipulated Ruiz was not convicted of a serious felony and should have been placed on post-release community supervision (PRCS) rather than parole when he was released from prison, the trial court denied Ruiz’s motion to dismiss the petition as untimely under Penal Code1 section 3000.08, subdivision (l), because he did not challenge his supervision placement within 60 days of his release. Ruiz contends the application of section 3000.08, subdivision (l) in this instance infringed his constitutional rights to due process and equal protection. We conclude the application of the 60-day limitation in this case violated Ruiz’s procedural due process rights. Therefore, we reverse the order and direct the trial court to enter a new order granting Ruiz’s motion to dismiss and transferring Ruiz from parole supervision to PRCS. II FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Ruiz pleaded guilty to unlawful possession of brass knuckles (§ 21810) and misdemeanor vandalism (§ 594, subds. (a), (b)(2)(A)) for defacing another’s property by tagging where the value of the damage was less than $400. He admitted an allegation the vandalism was done in association with and for the benefit of a street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (d)). He was sentenced to three years in state prison. 1 Statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise stated. 2 Ruiz was released from prison on parole supervision on April 9, 2018. The CDCR provided him a document entitled “Notice and Conditions of Parole,” which stated he was being released to parole supervision and advised him of the conditions of his parole. The notice advised him of the right to appeal the conditions of his parole. Ruiz was continued on parole without formal revocation seven times between April and the end of December 2018. The CDCR filed a parole revocation petition in June 2019 alleging Ruiz had absconded parole supervision since January 2019. On June 24, 2019, the court revoked Ruiz’s parole and set a hearing for the next day. Ruiz’s appointed counsel for the parole revocation proceeding discovered Ruiz’s crimes did not constitute a serious felony and, therefore, he should have been placed on PRCS instead of under parole. The next day, Ruiz filed a form requesting a parole revocation evidentiary hearing and challenging parole jurisdiction. He also …

Original document

Add comment

Your Header Sidebar area is currently empty. Hurry up and add some widgets.