Mayberry

People v. Mayberry

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 4, 2024F085869California3,912 words

Opinion

Opinion

Filed 6/4/

CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE,

F085869

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. F18904486) v.

DARRYN MAYBERRY, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Fresno County. Houry A. Sanderson, Judge. William D. Farber, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez, Kari Mueller, Lewis A. Martinez, and Joseph M. Penney, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo- The trial court found defendant Darryn Mayberry ineligible for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.75. It reasoned that the original sentence was “illegal” due to the section 667.5, former subdivision (b) enhancements2 being imposed but stayed, the sentence was not appealed, and the court therefore did not have the “ability” to “go back in time and do anything about those illegal sentences.” Defendant appealed from that ruling. We conclude…

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.