People v. Woodward CA1/2

Filed 9/24/24 P. v. Woodward CA1/2

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. A167546 JOHNIE MONROE WOODWARD, JR., (Contra Costa County Defendant and Appellant. Super. Ct. No. 05008913386)

Johnie Monroe Woodward, Jr. appeals from a February 2023 resentencing hearing at which the trial court struck an enhancement under Penal Code section 1172.751 and stayed two firearm enhancements. We conclude the trial court lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate Woodward’s motion for resentencing under section 1172.75. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal and vacate the resentencing order. BACKGROUND In March 1990, Woodward was sentenced to 24 years eight months to life in prison after a jury convicted him of second degree murder (§ 187) and

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

other offenses. Woodward’s sentence included two firearm enhancements (§ 12022.5) and a one-year enhancement for a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). In June 2022, Woodward filed a petition to recall and resentence under former section 1171.1 (now § 1172.75).2 Before the hearing on his petition, Woodward filed a motion for a full resentencing, contending his one-year prior prison term enhancement had become invalid under section 1172.75. He requested the trial court strike the prior prison term enhancement, impose the middle term for his aggravated assault conviction, and strike the two firearm enhancements. In February 2023, pursuant to section 1172.75, the trial court struck the prior prison term enhancement and imposed the requested middle term for the aggravated assault conviction but stayed the firearm enhancements. Woodward appealed. We requested supplemental briefing to address whether the trial court had jurisdiction to resentence Woodward under section 1172.75 in the first instance, given the request for relief was initiated by Woodward’s own motion for resentencing. DISCUSSION Woodward asserts the trial court had no authority to stay the firearm enhancements. We do not address this contention because we determine the court lacked authority to provide any resentencing relief under section 1172.75. Section 1172.75, subdivision (a) provides in relevant part that any sentence enhancement imposed under section 667.5, subdivision (b) before