California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Jordan, E063761 (Cal. App. 2016):
Whether Proposition 47 applies to defendant's conviction for second degree burglary is a question of statutory interpretation we review de novo. (People v. Prunty (2015) 62 Cal.4th 59, 71.) "When we interpret an initiative, we apply the same principles governing statutory construction. We first consider the initiative's language, giving the words their ordinary meaning and construing this language in the context of the statute and initiative as a whole. If the language is not ambiguous, we presume the voters intended the meaning apparent from that language, and we may not add to the statute or rewrite it to conform to some assumed intent not apparent from that language. If the language is ambiguous, courts may consider ballot summaries and arguments in determining the voters' intent and understanding of a ballot measure." (People v. Superior Court (Pearson) (2010) 48 Cal.4th 564, 571.)
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.