People v. White CA4/1

Filed 4/22/25 P. v. White CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D083841

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCN004867)

DONALD PAUL WHITE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David J. Danielsen, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Richard Jay Moller, 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, Eric A. Swenson and Heather M. Clark, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

I INTRODUCTION In 1995, Donald Paul White was sentenced to prison after a jury found

him guilty of first degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)),1 and being a felon in possession of a firearm (§ 12021, subd. (a)), and the sentencing court found true allegations he suffered two prison prior terms (former § 667.5, subd. (b)). On direct appeal, our court determined the sentencing court had committed sentencing error, but we affirmed the remainder of the judgment of conviction and remanded the matter solely for resentencing purposes. (People v. Barrier (Jan. 8, 1997, D024298) [nonpub. opn.].) On remand, the sentencing court imposed an aggregate sentence of 114 years to life in prison. The court imposed, but stayed, the two prison prior enhancements. Thereafter, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill No. 483 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.), which added section 1171.1 to the Penal Code. That provision, which has since been renumbered as section 1172.75, declares most previously imposed prison prior enhancements legally invalid. (§ 1172.75, subd. (a).) It also compels courts: (1) to recall the sentence of any inmate who is currently serving a term for a judgment with a now-invalid prison prior enhancement; and (2) to resentence the inmate. (Id., subds. (c)–(d).) Pursuant to section 1172.75, the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (hereafter, CDCR) identified White as an inmate who may be entitled to resentencing because he was serving a sentence that included a prison prior enhancement under former section 667.5, subdivision (b). However, the trial court declined to resentence White, apparently under the mistaken belief the sentencing court had stricken the prison prior