People v. Manzo CA4/1

Filed 11/6/24 P. v. Manzo CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D084299

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. RIF143566) JESSE MANZO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Riverside County, John D. Molloy, Judge. Reversed and remanded with instructions. Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Robin Urbanski, and Brendon W. Marshall, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION Jesse Manzo appeals an order denying him resentencing under Penal

Code,1 section 1172.75. Because the trial court’s ruling was based on an erroneous interpretation of section 1172.75, we reverse and remand for full resentencing of the noncapital offenses. In 2013, a jury convicted Manzo of first degree murder with special circumstances (§§ 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(16), (22); count 1) and found true numerous enhancement allegations. The jury also convicted Manzo of unlawfully owning and having in his possession a handgun as a convicted felon (former § 12021, subd. (a)(1), the predecessor statute to § 29800; count 2). The jury fixed the penalty as death for the murder count and the court, accordingly, entered a judgment of death. The court also imposed a consecutive indeterminate sentence of 25 years to life for a firearm enhancement (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)) alleged with count 1 and imposed but struck the punishment for a street gang enhancement (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(c)) alleged for count 1. The court imposed and stayed a determinate term of three years for count 2 and imposed and stayed a one- year term for the prison prior allegation (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). Effective January 1, 2022, section 1172.75 was added to the Penal Code by virtue of the passage of Senate Bill No. 483 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.). (Stats. 2021, ch. 728, § 3.) With one exception not applicable here, section 1172.75 provides that prison prior enhancements “imposed prior to January 1, 2020” pursuant to section 667.5, subdivision (b) are “legally invalid.” (§ 1172.75, subd. (a).) It directs the Department of Corrections