What is the current burden of proof under Proposition 47 of the California Supreme Court?

filed his petition, there was no judicial guidance available regarding which party retained the initial burden of proof, nor what type or quality of evidence was required. Moreover, given the separate provisions for petitions and applications, appellant "may have been misled about the requirements" of applying for relief under Proposition 47. (See People v. Perkins (2016) 244 Cal.App.4th 129, 139-140.) Accordingly, we reverse the denial with prejudice.⁷ Should appellant be eligible to reapply under Proposition 47, any new petition must describe the stolen property in his possession and attach some probative evidence of its value.