People v. Navarro CA6

Filed 3/19/25 P. v. Navarro CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H051272 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. Nos. F1556292 & F1557826) v.

CESAR ARMANDO NAVARRO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Cesar Armando Navarro1 sought resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.75.2 This statute provides for resentencing in eligible cases in which a prior prison term enhancement under former section 667.5, subdivision (b) was imposed before January 1, 2020. The trial court denied resentencing, reasoning that Navarro was not eligible for resentencing because the punishment for his prior prison term enhancements was stricken. The trial court thus concluded that these enhancements were not “imposed,” as required by section 1172.75, subdivision (a). On appeal, Navarro argues that the trial court erred in denying him resentencing because an enhancement under former section 667.5, subdivision (b) for which the punishment was stricken was nonetheless imposed within the meaning of section 1172.75, subdivision (a). We agree and reverse.

Navarro’s middle name is alternatively spelled as “Armondo” at points in the 1

appellate record. 2 Unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND3 This matter involves four cases that were joined for purposes of sentencing. In case No. F1556292, Navarro pleaded no contest to false personation (§ 529), and he admitted a prior prison term allegation (former § 667.5, subd. (b)). In case No. F1557826, Navarro pleaded no contest to second degree burglary (§§ 459, 460, subd. (b)), and he again admitted a prior prison term allegation (former § 667.5, subd. (b)). The remaining two cases did not include prior prison term allegations. At sentencing, the trial court struck the punishment for the prior prison term allegations. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 20 years in prison. Effective in 2020, the Legislature limited the circumstances in which a prior prison term enhancement may apply, and effective in 2022, it enacted what is now section 1172.75 to allow for resentencing in cases involving now-invalid prior prison term enhancements. (§ 667.5, subd. (b), as amended by Stats. 2019, ch. 590, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 2020; former § 1171.1, added by Stats. 2021, ch. 728, § 3, eff. Jan. 1, 2022, renumbered without substantive change as § 1172.75 by Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 12, eff. June 30, 2022.) Navarro petitioned for resentencing under section 1172.75 in 2023. The prosecution asserted that Navarro was ineligible for resentencing because prior prison term enhancements for which the punishment was stricken were not “imposed” within the meaning of section 1172.75, subdivision (a). The trial court denied resentencing, stating: “The section 667.5(b) enhancement was not ‘imposed’ because no additional term of punishment was added to the base when the punishment was stayed or stricken at the time of sentencing.” Navarro timely appealed.