Faustinos

BACKGROUND

In 2019, Faustinos pled guilty to forcible rape (§ 261, subd. (a)(2)). Under his

plea agreement, the court sentenced him to 16 years imprisonment: eight years for the

rape, doubled due to a prior strike.

In 2023, Faustinos petitioned for resentencing with a motion that cited and

discussed several recent ameliorative sentencing laws, though it did not discuss the facts

1 Unlabeled statutory citations refer to the Penal Code.

2 of Faustinos’s case, nor did it apply the laws to them. The court took no action, stating it

“[did] not have jurisdiction to consider [the] motion.”

ANALYSIS

Faustinos argues that the trial court erred in issuing its order taking no action on

his request for resentencing under section 1172.1. We dismiss this appeal because the

trial court’s order is not appealable.

The right to appeal is determined by statute. (People v. Mazurette (2001)

Cal.4th 789, 792.) The Penal Code provides that an order after a judgment in a criminal

case is appealable if it affects “the substantial rights of the party.” (§ 1237, subd. (b).)

Whether the substantial rights of a party are affected depends on the type of claim

raised in trial court, not the…