People v. Austin CA2/6

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 21, 2025B337910California850 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

In 2005, Austin was convicted of four counts of home invasion robbery (§§ 211, 213, subd. (a)(1)(A)), one count of criminal threats (§ 422), and one count of residential burglary (§ 459). The jury found he personally used a firearm in committing these offenses (§§ 12022.5, subd. (a), 12022.53, subd. (b)) and was out on bail at the time he committed these offenses (§ 12022.1, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced him to an aggregate term of 35 years in prison. In 2024, Austin filed a “Motion for Invitation” for resentencing under section 1172.1. The People filed an opposition claiming Austin lacked standing under section 1172.1. They also claimed that he did not fall within the positive resentencing factors of that section because: 1) he “had numerous disciplinary rule violations” while in prison; and 2) he had a youthful offender parole suitability hearing in 2024, he did not attend the hearing, and the parole board found he was “an unreasonable risk to public safety and denied parole for 5 years.” Austin challenged these claims. He presented certificates of completion of rehabilitation programs. He presented witnesses who claimed he had reformed and was no longer the type…

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.