People v. Orellana CA5

INTRODUCTION

Appellant and defendant Raul Shawn Orellana (defendant) was convicted after a jury trial of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211),1 and sentenced to an aggregate second strike term of seven years in prison based on the court’s imposition of the midterm.2 After defendant was sentenced and while his appeal was pending, “the Legislature enacted Senate Bill No. 567 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 731) (Senate Bill 567)” that amended subdivision (b)(6)(A) of section 1170 to create “a presumption that the sentencing court ‘shall’ enter a lower term sentence when, among other things, a ‘psychological, physical, or childhood trauma’ contributed to the offense. [Citation.] The sentencing court may only depart from this lower term presumption if it finds that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating circumstances such that the lower term would be contrary to ‘the interests of justice.’ ” (People v. Salazar (2023) 15 Cal.5th 416, 419 (Salazar).) As the result of these amendments, section 1170, subdivision (b)(1) states that the court shall, “in its sound discretion,” order imposition of the middle term except as otherwise provided. Subdivision (b)(6)(A)…