People v. Miller CA1/5

Filed 6/6/25 P. v. Miller CA1/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, A170201 Plaintiff and Respondent, v. (Sonoma County Super. Ct. No. SCR-598331-1) JARROD JOSEPH MILLER, Defendant and Appellant.

Jarrod Joseph Miller (appellant) appeals from the trial court’s denial of his request for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code 1171.1.1 We affirm. BACKGROUND In 2012, appellant was convicted of first degree murder with personal discharge of a firearm causing death (§§ 187, subd. (a), 12022.53, subd. (d)), and burglary with personal use of a firearm (§§ 459, 12022.5, subd. (a)).2 Appellant was sentenced to an aggregate prison term of 50 years to life. This court affirmed the judgment on appeal. (People v. Miller (2014) 231 Cal.App.4th 1301.)

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

2 The underlying facts are not relevant to this appeal.

1

In December 2023, appellant, acting in propria persona, filed a document entitled, “Request for Recall of Sentence and Resentencing Pursuant to Assembly Bill 600 and Penal Code section 1172.1.” (Capitalization altered.) In it, appellant argued new law granted the trial court authority to dismiss the firearm enhancement. In January 2024, the court issued an order denying the request: “Because this case is final on appeal, this Court has no jurisdiction to address petitioner’s invitation for the Court to grant the relief he seeks. Furthermore, the petitioner fails to demonstrate that any changes in law, since the time of his sentencing for the conviction offense, apply retroactively to his sentence.” Appellant appeals from this order. DISCUSSION “Effective January 1, 2024, the Legislature amended section 1172.1 to expand the court’s ability to recall and resentence a defendant on its own motion. (See Assem. Bill No. 600 (2023–2024 Reg. Sess.); Stats. 2023, ch. 446, § 2.) Now, a court . . . may recall the sentence on its own motion ‘at any time if the applicable sentencing laws at the time of original sentencing are subsequently changed by new statutory authority or case law.’ (§ 1172.1, subd. (a)(1).) This recall-and-resentencing ‘may be initiated by the original sentencing judge, a judge designated by the presiding judge, or any judge with jurisdiction in the case.’ (Ibid.)” (People v. Faustinos (2025) 109 Cal.App.5th 687, 694–695, petn. for review filed Apr. 15, 2025.) The People contend the trial court’s order is nonappealable, pointing to a provision in the amended statute providing, “A defendant is not entitled to file a petition seeking relief from the court under this section. If a defendant requests consideration for relief under this section, the court is not required to respond.” (§ 1172.1, subd. (c).) In light of this provision, the People