P. v. Meeks
Sharon Meeks appeals from a judgment entered after a jury convicted her of simple possession of a controlled substance (cocaine base). (Health & Saf. Code, § 11350.) After Meeks waived her right to jury trial on prior conviction allegations, the trial court found true that Meeks had suffered eight prior prison term convictions within the meaning of Penal Code[1] section 667.5, subdivision (b), and had suffered one prior serious or violent felony conviction within the meaning of the Three Strikes Law (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(1) & 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)). The court sentenced Meeks to eight years and eight months in prison: the low term of 16 months for the offense, doubled under the Three Strikes Law, plus six years for six prior prison term convictions.[2] The court awarded Meeks custody credit of 247 days and conduct credit of 122 days.
Meeks contends she is entitled to additional presentence conduct credits under the October 2011 amendment to section 4019, arguing the amendment should be applied retroactively to her sentence under principles of equal protection of the law. Applying Supreme Court precedent, People v. Brown (2012) 54 Cal.4th 314, 330, we reject Meeks’s contention.
Meeks also asks this court to review the record of the in camera hearing on her Pitchess motion. (Pitchess v. Superior Court (1974) 11 Cal.3d 531.) We conditionally reverse the judgment and remand the matter because the record demonstrates Meeks was entitled to disclosure of additional discoverable information.[3]
Comments on P. v. Meeks