People v. Strawn CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 20, 2024C099475California600 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mesiwala, J.

DISCUSSION

Where, as here, the defendant has been notified that his appeal may be dismissed pursuant to Delgadillo and he files a supplemental brief raising issues he wants considered, we evaluate the issues presented but need not independently review the

2 record. (People v. Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at pp. 228-232.) We evaluate those issues below.

1. Defendant Was Not Entitled to a Hearing or Counsel Pursuant to Sections 1172.75 or 1172.1 Under section 1172.75, “Any sentence enhancement that was imposed prior to January 1, 2020, pursuant to subdivision (b) of [s]ection 667.5, except for any enhancement imposed for a prior conviction for a sexually violent offense as defined in subdivision (b) of [s]ection 6600 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is legally invalid.” (§ 1172.75, subd. (a).) Relief is obtained by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation notifying the sentencing court of an individual in its custody who currently is serving a prison term that includes a section 667.5 enhancement (§ 1172.75, subd. (b)), and the trial court then has jurisdiction to review the judgment and recall and resentence the defendant. (§ 1172.75, subd. (c).) Defendant’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.