RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A California appellate court has ruled that certain felony marijuana cultivation convictions may be reduced to misdemeanors, reversing a San Bernardino County judge’s determination that the offenses were ineligible for reclassification.
In a decision certified for publication Oct. 22, the California Court of Appeal, Fourth Appellate District, Division Two, held that Health and Safety Code Section 11358, subdivision (d), permits certain aggravated marijuana cultivation offenses to be treated as wobblers, meaning they may be classified as either felonies or misdemeanors.
The ruling in People v. Baxter allows trial courts to consider reducing qualifying felony convictions even when the original charges involved allegations of environmental harm or illegal waste discharge.
In February 2023, Amanda Qiaoqun Baxter was charged with nine counts of felony marijuana cultivation, five counts of misdemeanor possession of marijuana for sale, three counts of felony receipt of proceeds derived from controlled substances and two counts of felony conspiracy to cultivate marijuana.
Prosecutors also alleged aggravating circumstances involving the illegal discharge of waste or substantial environmental harm to public lands and other public resources.
Baxter pleaded guilty to two counts of felony marijuana cultivation and one count of misdemeanor possession of marijuana for sale in March 2023.
The trial court suspended imposition of sentence, placed her on probation for two years, ordered restitution and required her to serve 240 days in county jail through a work-release program.
After completing the conditions of her probation in March 2025, Baxter filed motions to dismiss her convictions under Penal Code Section 1203.4 and to reclassify her felony convictions as misdemeanors under Penal Code Section 17, subdivision (b).
Reclassification can have legal and practical consequences, including reducing certain employment and professional licensing restrictions associated with felony convictions.
Baxter argued that subdivision (d) of Section 11358 constitutes a wobbler, a category of offense that may be punished as either a misdemeanor or a felony depending on the circumstances and the trial court’s discretion.
According to Cornell Law School, a wobbler is an offense that may be charged and punished as either a felony or a misdemeanor.
Under Penal Code Section 17, subdivision (b), courts may reduce qualifying felony convictions to misdemeanors under specified circumstances, including when probation has been granted without imposition of sentence.
The trial court granted Baxter’s motion for dismissal under Penal Code Section 1203.4 but denied her request for reclassification under Section 17, subdivision (b).
The judge reasoned that “[t]he language of the statute itself does not permit or make this a wobbler.”
Baxter appealed, maintaining that subdivision (d) of Section 11358 permits misdemeanor treatment and that the trial court committed legal error by treating the offenses as straight felonies.
The California attorney general’s office agreed with Baxter that the offenses were eligible for misdemeanor reclassification and supported returning the case to the trial court for reconsideration.
However, the San Bernardino County District Attorney’s Office filed an amicus curiae brief opposing that interpretation and urging the appellate court to uphold the trial court’s ruling.
Before the passage of Proposition 64 in 2016, Health and Safety Code Section 11358 classified marijuana cultivation activities, including planting, harvesting, drying and processing, as felony offenses.
Proposition 64, known as the Adult Use of Marijuana Act, amended Section 11358 and several related provisions governing marijuana offenses.
The measure legalized specified recreational marijuana activities for adults 21 and older, reduced criminal penalties for certain marijuana-related offenses and established procedures allowing eligible individuals to seek resentencing, dismissal or redesignation of prior convictions.
According to the Judicial Branch of California, Proposition 64 also created mechanisms for individuals convicted under previous marijuana laws to seek relief under the revised statutory framework.
Under Health and Safety Code Section 11358, subdivision (c), adults who cultivate more than six living cannabis plants generally face misdemeanor punishment of up to six months in county jail, a fine of up to $500 or both.
Subdivision (d), however, provides that cultivation involving more than six plants may be punished as a felony when specified aggravating circumstances are present, including certain violations involving water discharge or substantial environmental harm.
The appellate court examined the statutory language, particularly the difference between the phrases “shall be punished” in subdivision (c) and “may be punished” in subdivision (d).
The court determined that the mandatory language in subdivision (c) requires misdemeanor punishment, while the permissive language in subdivision (d) allows judicial discretion when aggravating circumstances are present.
Because felony punishment under subdivision (d) is discretionary, the court concluded that the offense qualifies as a wobbler rather than a straight felony.
The appellate court also rejected the San Bernardino County district attorney’s reliance on People v. Mora-Duran, a 2020 appellate decision that prosecutors argued established aggravated marijuana cultivation as a straight felony.
The court found that Mora-Duran did not address whether subdivision (d) of Section 11358 constitutes a wobbler and therefore did not resolve the question presented in Baxter’s appeal.
The appellate court reversed the trial court’s order denying Baxter’s motion and remanded the case for reconsideration.
The ruling does not automatically reduce Baxter’s convictions to misdemeanors. Instead, the trial court must exercise its discretion under Penal Code Section 17, subdivision (b), to determine whether reclassification is appropriate.
The published decision establishes that qualifying aggravated marijuana cultivation convictions under Section 11358, subdivision (d), are eligible for consideration as misdemeanors, including when an individual seeks relief after completing probation.
To comment please go to one of these social media platforms:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/DavisVanguard
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/peoples-vanguard-of-davis-inc/
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/davisvanguard/
X: https://x.com/davisvanguard
Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/vanguardnewsgroup.bsky.social
Subscribe to the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
