People v. Gary CA2/2

Filed 10/10/24 P. v. Gary CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, B330533

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. YA001887) v.

RICKEY LYNN GARY,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William C. Ryan, Judge. Affirmed.

William L. Heyman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior

Assistant Attorney General, Zee Rodriguez, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Charles S. Lee, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

****** Rickey Lynn Gary (defendant) argues that he is entitled to a hearing under People v. Franklin (2016) 63 Cal.4th 261 (Franklin) in anticipation of a future youth offender parole hearing under Penal Code section 3051, even though he is ineligible for relief under section 3051 because he was 19 years old when he committed the crime and was sentenced to prison for life without the possibility of parole (LWOP).1 Specifically, defendant argues that the statute’s denial of relief to young offenders sentenced to LWOP violates equal protection and constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. Precedent either forecloses or counsels strongly in favor of rejecting his arguments. We accordingly affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Facts2 A. The underlying crimes In June 1989, defendant and Richard Henry Ponton (Ponton) robbed an Arco gas station in Redondo Beach, California. The station manager was shot four to six times, and