People v. Knox CA3

Filed 1/30/25 P. v. Knox CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C101113

v. (Super. Ct. No. 03F06958)

ANTHONY MARCELOUS KNOX,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Anthony Marcelous Knox appeals from a trial court resentencing order under Penal Code section 1172.751 in which the trial court dismissed a prior prison term enhancement but declined to dismiss prior strike convictions. Defendant’s appellate counsel filed a brief under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) and People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), asking this court to review the record and determine if there are any arguable issues on appeal. Defendant subsequently filed a supplemental brief. Finding no merit in the contentions asserted in defendant’s supplemental brief, we will affirm the trial court’s resentencing order.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

BACKGROUND In 2002, when defendant was 33 years old, he had sexual intercourse with a 14- year-old girl, resulting in the birth of a child. (People v. Knox (June 1, 2007, C051802) [nonpub. opn.] (Knox).) Police officers attempted paternity testing, but defendant’s cousin impersonated defendant during the testing. (Ibid.) The cousin later told police that defendant had paid him $300 to impersonate defendant while providing a DNA sample. Defendant was found guilty of committing a lewd or lascivious act upon a 14-year-old child and being at least 10 years older than the victim (§ 288, subd. (c)(1)), felony unlawful sexual intercourse (§ 261.5, subd. (d)), aiding and abetting false impersonation (§ 529, former subd. (3)), and misdemeanor resisting a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). The trial court found true a prior prison term enhancement allegation (former § 667.5, subd. (b)) and three prior strike conviction allegations (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12). The prior strikes involved two 1989 convictions for attempted murder (§§ 664,187) and a 1988 conviction for first degree burglary (§ 459). (Knox, supra, C051802.) The trial court dismissed one count of rape by means of force. (§ 261, subd. (a)(2).) In January 2006, the trial court denied defendant’s Romero2 motion and sentenced him to 25 years to life in prison, plus one year for the prior prison term enhancement. This court affirmed the judgment but modified defendant’s custody credits. (Knox, supra, C051802.) The trial court subsequently received notice from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation that defendant was eligible for resentencing under section 1172.75. In September 2023, the trial court appointed counsel and requested briefing.