People v. Rose CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 21, 2025D084863California3,558 words

Opinion

Opinion

Do, J.

INTRODUCTION

Earl Rose appeals from an order striking his one-year prison prior

enhancement under Penal Code1 section 1172.75. He contends the trial court erred by (1) not conducting a full resentencing hearing after striking the

prison prior enhancement and (2) denying his request for a Franklin2 hearing. We affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

In 2009, a jury convicted Rose of first degree felony murder (§ 187, subd. (a); count 1), two counts of attempted murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); counts 2, 4), robbery (§ 211; count 3), attempted robbery (§§ 664, 211; count

5), and possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1); count 6).3 As to counts 1 to 5, the jury found true Rose personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury or death (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). The jury also found he had four prior strike convictions (§§ 1170.12, subds. (a)–(d), 667, subds. (b)–(i)), five serious felony prior convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)); and one prison prior term conviction (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). At sentencing in 2010, the trial court sentenced Rose to life without the possibility of parole plus 25 years to life for the firearm enhancement for count 1; a…

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.