Skip to content
Name: People v. Newell (2023) 93 Cal.App.5th 265
Case #: B320195
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 07/06/2023

Appeal from the denial of a pro per petition based on Senate Bill No. 483 dismissed because Penal Code section 1172.75 did not authorize the inmate's petition. Newell was convicted of felony offenses in 2012. His sentence included a one-year consecutive term for a prison prior (Pen. Code, § 667.5(b)). Years later Newell filed a pro per petition for resentencing with the sentencing court, citing SB 483, which added section 1171.1 effective 1/1/2022 (now renumbered to § 1172.75). Newell should be resentenced pursuant to section 1172.75. The trial court denied the petition, finding Newell must wait for CDCR to file…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Hodges (2023) 92 Cal.App.5th 186
Case #: B323199
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 06/02/2023

Because the trial court had no jurisdiction to grant defendant’s motion to vacate his sentence, the order denying relief was not appealable. In 2001, defendant was sentenced to 230 years to life as a three strikes offender. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. In 2022, he filed a motion to vacate his sentence on the ground that it was unauthorized, asserting that he should only be sentenced as a second strike offender. The trial court denied relief. Hodges appealed. After appellate counsel filed a brief raising no issues and requesting review under Wende and Delgadillo, Hodges filed two supplemental briefs pro per, raising…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Mount
Case #: A161195
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 1
Opinion Date: 07/15/2021

Trial court properly dismissed a Penal Code section 1170.18, subdivision (f) (Prop. 47) petition filed by an attorney on behalf of a deceased defendant, where there was no showing how granting the petition would provide a benefit. Defendant died in 2012. In 2020, the public defender filed a petition under section 1170.18 to have his 1998 felony conviction designated as a misdemeanor. The trial court dismissed the petition and the public defender appealed. Held: Appeal dismissed. A petition to recall a sentence and designate a felony as a misdemeanor under 1170.18, subdivision (f) is moot…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Johnson
Case #: B290213
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 6
Opinion Date: 03/04/2019

Because Senate Bill No. 620 (granting courts discretion to dismiss firearm use enhancements) is not retroactive to cases whose judgments were final on its effective date, defendant's appeal must be dismissed. In 2009, Johnson was convicted of second degree murder and a firearm enhancement (Pen. Code, § 12022.53, subd. (b)) was found true. The judgment was final in 2011. In 2018, Johnson filed a motion to be resentenced within the provisions of SB 620, which amended Penal Code sections 12022.5 and 12022.53 to grant the trial court discretion to dismiss or stay the firearm enhancements. The trial court…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Chamizo
Case #: C086712
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 3 DCA
Opinion Date: 02/27/2019

Because the amendment to Health and Safety Code section 11370.2 (narrowing the crimes subject to the enhancement) was not retroactive to cases whose judgments were final on its effective date, defendant's appeal must be dismissed. In 2015, Chamizo pleaded no contest to felony transportation of cocaine and admitted two section 11370.2, subdivision (a) enhancements based on his prior drug convictions. He did not appeal and the judgment became final in 2015. In 2017, the Legislature amended section 11370.2 to narrow the crimes to which the enhancement provision applied, effective January 1, 2018 (SB 180). As amended, the sentence enhancement provided…

View Full Summary
Name: Washington v. Ryan
Case #: 07-15536
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 06/17/2015

Death row inmate who filed notice of appeal in federal habeas proceedings one day late due to a miscalculation of the filing deadline by attorney's secretary was not entitled to relief. Washington, Robinson, and Mathers were convicted of first degree murder among other offenses in Arizona state court. They were all sentenced to death. Mathers's conviction was reversed on direct appeal. Robinson's federal habeas petition for a new penalty phase trial was granted by the Ninth Circuit. Washington also filed a federal habeas petition, raising the same issue as Robinson, but the district court denied relief. Washington's notice of appeal…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Zuniga
Case #: E057444
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 4 DCA
Division: 2
Opinion Date: 04/28/2014

Appeal dismissed where defendant challenged the factual basis for his plea without first obtaining a certificate of probable cause (CPC). Zuniga pled no contest to participating in a criminal street gang (Pen. Code, § 186.22, subd. (a)); a drug charge was dismissed. The prosecution and defense stipulated that there was a factual basis for the plea. Although Zuniga filed a notice of appeal, he did not obtain a CPC. On appeal, he relied on People v. Rodriguez, which was decided after he was sentenced, to argue that his conviction was void because he acted alone, so legally there…

View Full Summary
Name: U.S. v. Barrios-Siguenza
Case #: 13-10110
Court: US Court of Appeals
District 9 Cir
Opinion Date: 04/09/2014

Defendant who is deported during pendency of appeal is entitled to have invalid conviction reversed. Defendant appealed his convictions for assault on a federal officer and illegal entry into the United States. During the pendency of the appeal he was deported. In a memorandum disposition, the Ninth Circuit vacated the assault conviction and remanded for a new trial. The government had requested that defendant's conviction be affirmed, without prejudice to a later request to vacate the conviction should he return to the U.S. or waive his presence at retrial. In this opinion, the court rejected this request. Although this approach…

View Full Summary
Name: People v. Schaefer
Case #: A131539
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 1 DCA
Division: 4
Opinion Date: 08/29/2012

Trial court had no jurisdiction to order restitution after appellate court ordered abatement of all proceedings following appellant's death. Schaefer was convicted of second degree murder and other offenses as a result of a motorcycle crash that killed a nine-year-old girl. Schaefer died while his appeal was pending, and the appellate court granted defense counsel's request to abate all proceedings pending before the court, and ordered the trial court to abate all proceedings with respect to Schaefer. The trial court subsequently concluded that Schaefer's death did not did not abate victim restitution ordered pursuant to Penal Code section 1202.4,…

View Full Summary
Name: Polanski v. Superior Court
Case #: B217290
Court: CA Court of Appeal
District 2 DCA
Division: 7
Opinion Date: 12/21/2009

The trial court did not abuse its discretion in applying the fugitive disentitlement doctrine and dismissing without prejudice the motion to dismiss the action. Director Roman Polanski entered a plea to statutory rape, went to prison for a 90-day diagnostic study, but then fled the country before sentencing because he believed the judge was going to send him to prison as a result of public criticism. Around the same time, defense counsel filed a motion to disqualify the judge. The judge denied bias, but agreed to transfer the case. In 1997, the parties met with a different…

View Full Summary