People v. Green CA3

Filed 4/29/25 P. v. Green CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C101491

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 18FE006985)

v.

JARVON DARMARIOUS GREEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jarvon Darmarious Green appeals from a postconviction order denying his request for recall and resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.75. Defendant contends the trial court erred in concluding that he was ineligible for resentencing. We affirm the trial court’s order. BACKGROUND In June 2024, the trial court determined that defendant was ineligible for resentencing because the enhancement imposed after trial for a prior prison term had previously been stricken by this court in July 2020. The following sets forth the chronology of events.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

In November 2018, a jury found defendant guilty of making a criminal threat (§ 422) and dissuading a witness (§ 136.1, subd. (b)(1)). In April 2019, the trial court found defendant had suffered two prior strike convictions (§ 667, subds. (b)-(i)) and two prior serious felony convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)), and had served a prior prison term (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court struck the punishment for one of defendant’s two prior strikes, electing not to impose a sentence of 25 years to life. The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate prison term of 17 years, which included the upper term of three years for the criminal threat count, doubled to six years by the strike, two five-year terms for the prior serious felonies, and one year for the prior prison term. The trial court also imposed the low term of 16 months which was doubled to 32 months on the dissuading a witness count, which the court stayed under section 654. (People v. Green (July 8, 2020, C089310) [nonpub. opn.] (Green).) Defendant appealed, and in a decision issued on July 8, 2020, this court agreed that his one-year prior prison term enhancement was invalid under then-newly enacted Senate Bill No. 136 (2019-2020 Reg. Sess.), which “narrowed the eligibility for the one-year prison prior enhancement to those who have served a prior prison sentence for a sexually violent offense . . . .” (Green, supra, C089310.) We “modif[ied] the judgment to strike defendant’s prior prison enhancement imposed under section 667.5, subdivision (b),” directed the trial court to prepare an amended abstract of judgment reflecting this modification for forwarding to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR), and affirmed the judgment as modified. (Green, supra, C089310.) On December 22, 2020, the trial court filed an amended abstract striking the punishment for the prison prior. Thereafter, on October 8, 2021, the Governor signed Senate Bill No. 483 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill No. 483) (Stats. 2021, ch. 728, § 3). Effective January 1, 2022, the enactment added section 1171.1 later renumbered as section 1172.75, which provides: “Any sentence enhancement that was imposed prior to January 1, 2020, pursuant to