People v. Rico CA6

Filed 4/21/25 P. v. Rico CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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). opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, H051270 (Santa Clara County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. Nos. CC954780, CC962788) v.

ALBERTO RICO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Alberto Rico petitioned for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.75.1 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 Rico’s petition, reasoning that he was not eligible for resentencing because the punishment for one of his prior prison term enhancements was stayed and the punishment for the other prior prison term enhancement was stricken. The trial court thus concluded that these enhancements were not “imposed,” as required by section 1172.75, subdivision (a). On appeal, Rico argues that the trial court erred in denying his petition because an enhancement under former section 667.5, subdivision (b) for which the punishment was stayed or stricken was nonetheless imposed within the meaning of section 1172.75, subdivision (a). We agree and reverse.

1 Unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2 This matter involves three cases that were joined for purposes of sentencing. In case No. CC954780, Rico pleaded no contest to one count of possession of a controlled substance (Health & Saf. Code, § 11377, subd. (a)) and one count of possessing ammunition by a prohibited person (§ 12316, subd. (b)(1)). Rico also admitted that he sustained a prior strike conviction (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and a prior prison term (former § 667.5, subd. (b)). In case No. CC962788, Rico pleaded guilty or no contest to four counts of second degree robbery (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)) and admitted various enhancements, including a prior prison term enhancement under former section 667.5, subdivision (b). The third case did not involve a prior prison term allegation. At sentencing, the trial court imposed and stayed the punishment for one prior prison term allegation, and it struck the punishment for the other prior prison term allegation. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 16 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.) Rico petitioned for resentencing under section 1172.75 in 2023. The prosecution asserted that Rico was ineligible for resentencing because prior prison term enhancements for which the punishment was stayed or stricken were not “imposed” within the meaning of section 1172.75, subdivision (a). The trial court denied Rico’s