People v. Darling CA4/3

Filed 5/13/25 P. v. Darling 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G063794

v. (Super. Ct. No. 01WF1019)

ROBERT ERIN DARLING, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Andre Manssourian, Judge. Dismissed. Nancy J. King, 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, and Daniel Rogers, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Robert Erin Darling appeals after the trial court found it lacked jurisdiction to rule on his petition for recall and resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.75. Because the court declined to act on the petition— rather than deny the petition—there is no final order to appeal from. We dismiss this appeal. PROCEDURAL HISTORY In 2003, a jury convicted Darling of multiple felony offenses and found true multiple enhancements. The trial court also found true two sentencing enhancements under former section 667.5, subdivision (b) (prison prior enhancements). The court initially sentenced Darling to 150 years to life in prison and struck the prison prior enhancements for sentencing purposes. We remanded Darling’s case for resentencing twice following two separate appeals. (People v. Darling (July 20, 2005, G032321) [nonpub. opn.]; People v. Darling (April 30, 2007, G036752) [nonpub. opn.].) The court most recently resentenced Darling to 62 years to life in prison and, again, struck the prison prior enhancements for sentencing purposes. The true findings for both prison prior enhancements have remained a part of Darling’s judgment since the initial sentencing. On December 21, 2023, Darling petitioned the trial court for resentencing under sections 1172.7 and 1172.75, even though at that time his name did not appear on the Senate Bill No. 483 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) list provided by the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (DCR). Darling alleged he was eligible for resentencing regardless of whether the prison prior enhancements punishments were executed. The court deemed Darling ineligible for resentencing because his name was not on the DCR list.