People v. Stepney CA4/1

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 8, 2022D075171ACalifornia3,793 words

Opinion

Opinion

INTRODUCTION

Cameron Joron Stepney and Michael Bryson Rashad Johnson were each found guilty of two counts of second degree robbery. In a prior appeal, we vacated the defendants’ sentences and remanded the matter for resentencing to allow the trial court to exercise its discretion to strike or dismiss firearm enhancements attached to each count pursuant to Penal

Code section 12022.53, subdivision (b).1 (People v. Johnson (July 20, 2018, D073713) [nonpub. opn.].) At Stepney’s resentencing, the court struck one enhancement. At Johnson’s resentencing, the court declined to strike any enhancement.

Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted. 2 The defendants appeal. They argue they are entitled to resentencing due to recent legislative amendments to the sentencing laws. Alternatively, they argue resentencing is warranted because the trial court misunderstood the scope of its discretion to impose a lesser uncharged firearm enhancement under section 12022.5 after striking or dismissing a greater charged firearm enhancement under section 12022.53, subdivision (b). We conclude the defendants are entitled to resentencing in light of the…

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.