People v. Seanior CA5

Filed 8/6/24 P. v. Seanior CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F086469 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. Nos. VCF021364B-94, v. CR-13902-A)

EARL SEANIOR, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Nathan G. Leedy, Judge. Monica McMillan, 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, Hannah Janigian Chavez, and Max Feinstat, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Detjen, Acting P. J., Meehan, J. and Snauffer, J.

Seanior was sentenced to serve life in prison after he was convicted of a third strike. As part of that sentence, the trial court imposed but stayed an enhancement pursuant to Penal Code1 section 667.5, subdivision (b). Many years later, the Legislature largely eliminated that enhancement. The Legislature also enacted a procedure by which inmates serving sentences including section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancements could return to court for resentencing. (See § 1172.75.) Seanior availed himself of this process but was denied relief because the enhancement was imposed and stayed, not imposed and executed. The dispute on appeal centers around the same issue. Does section 1172.75 apply to sentences in which the section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancement was imposed but stayed, rather than executed? We agree with the several Courts of Appeal which conclude the answer is “yes.” (People v. Christianson (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 300, review granted Feb. 21, 2024, S283189 (Christianson); People v. Mayberry (2024) 102 Cal.App.5th 665 (Mayberry); but see People v. Rhodius (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 38, review granted Feb. 21, 2024, S283169 [does not apply].) BACKGROUND The Tulare County District Attorney charged Seanior with committing robbery and escape. (§§ 211 & 4530, subd. (c).) The charges also alleged various enhancements and allegations for prior convictions, including a section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancement. A jury found Seanior guilty as charged and all enhancements and allegations were found true. Ultimately, Seanior was sentenced to serve 35 years, eight months to life in prison. The section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancement was stayed.