People v. Langston CA4/2

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 22, 2024E082733California755 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

In 2019, Stanley Langston pled guilty to attempted murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a))

and admitted he personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (b)). In August 2022, he

filed a motion seeking resentencing under section 1172.75, which the trial court denied.

Langston appealed, and in April 2023, we dismissed his appeal and noted Langston was

not eligible for relief under section 1172.75. (People v. Langston (Apr. 6, 2023,

E080335) [2023 WL 2801953] [nonpub. opn.].)

In June 2023, Langston personally filed another motion for resentencing under

section 1172.75. In November 2023, while his new petition for resentencing was

pending, Langston personally filed a motion under People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d

118 and Faretta v. California (1975) 422 U.S. 806 citing dissatisfaction with, and alleged

ineffective assistance of counsel.

In November 2023, the court held a hearing on Langston’s petition for

resentencing under section 1172.75, and denied it because he was not eligible for relief.

The court acknowledged Langston’s motion regarding his dissatisfaction with counsel,

but did not rule on it. The court also stated that it did not believe Langston needed to…

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.