People v. Vargas CA4/3

Filed 3/11/25 P. v. Vargas CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G063553

v. (Super. Ct. No. 97NF0952)

RAY ANTHONY VARGAS, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Jonathan S. Fish, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Steven S. Lubliner, 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, Daniel Rogers, and Alana Cohen Butler, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Ray Anthony Vargas appeals from the denial of his petition for recall and resentencing pursuant to Penal Code sections 1172.7 and 1172.75.1 Vargas contends the plain language of the statute proves that the resentencing procedure is available to defendants whose former section 667.5, subdivision (b) (section 667.5(b)) enhancements were stayed. Accordingly, the trial court erred in denying him relief. We agree with Vargas and reverse and remand for resentencing. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In February 2000, a jury convicted Vargas of willful, deliberate, and premeditated attempted murder. (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); count 1.) The jury found true that Vargas personally used a firearm (§ 12022.5(a)), and personally inflicted great bodily harm (§12022.7). Thereafter, the trial court found all prior allegations true. Vargas was sentenced to a total of life in prison plus 18 years. As pertinent here, the court imposed one year for the former section 667.5(b) prior and stayed that sentence. In November 2023, Vargas filed a petition for recall and resentencing under sections 1172.7 and 1172.75. The following month, the trial court concluded Vargas was not eligible for relief under section 1172.75. The court found Vargas was ineligible for resentencing because Vargas’s prison prior was “either stayed or stricken at [the] time of sentencing” and thus never imposed and executed, citing People v. Rhodius (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 38 [prison priors that were imposed but stayed are not entitled to relief under the statute], review granted Feb. 21, 2024, S283169 (Rhodius). The court’s order denying relief in this case also stated, “If Defendant appeals this decision, the briefing, oral and written arguments, transcripts, decision,