People v. Jimenez CA4/2

DISCUSSION

Defendant contends the trial court erred in concluding he was ineligible for

resentencing under section 1172.75. We conclude the court did not err.

Defendant’s appeal revisits the question this court and others have considered

regarding whether a prior prison enhancement currently subject to a stay falls within

section 1172.75’s recall and resentencing procedure. The question turns on the statute’s

use of the word “imposed.” (§ 1172.75, subd. (a); see, e.g., People v. Christianson (2023)

97 Cal.App.5th 300, 311 (Christianson) [“The only question is whether the enhancements

were ‘imposed’ as the word is used in section 1172.75, subdivision (a)”], rev. granted

Feb. 21, 2024, S283189.)

In challenging the trial court’s ruling, defendant relies on cases decided since this

court held that a defendant whose sentence includes a prior prison enhancement imposed

under former section 667.5, subdivision (b), but currently stayed, is outside the

resentencing relief the Legislature intended in enacting section 1172.75. (See People v.

Rhodius (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 38 (Rhodius), rev. granted Feb. 21, 2024, S283169.) As

we explain, we see no reason to depart from Rhodius…