P. v. Arcila CA2/4

Filed 7/21/25 P. v Arcila CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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(a). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115(a).

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B337975

Plaintiff and Respondent, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA038696 v.

JORGE ARCILA,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jacqueline Lewis, Judge. Affirmed. Jennifer Peabody and Jennifer Hansen, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In 1999, a jury convicted defendant and appellant Jorge Arcila of murder (Pen. Code,1 § 187, subd. (a)), and the trial court sentenced him to 25 years to life in state prison. Arcila was 17 years old at the time of the offense. In January 2024, Arcila filed a petition for recall and resentencing under section 1170, subdivision (d)(1) and People v. Heard (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 608 (Heard).2 In May 2024, the trial court issued a written order summarily denying Arcila’s petition. In denying Arcila relief, the court explained that because Arcila was sentenced to 25 years to life when he was 19 years old, he will be eligible for parole when he is 44 years old, and consequently, he was not sentenced to the functional equivalent of LWOP. Court-appointed appellate counsel filed a brief identifying no arguable issues in the trial court’s ruling and requesting discretionary independent review of the record under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Degladillo). Arcila then filed a supplemental brief on his own behalf.

1 All undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 Section 1170, subdivision (d)(1)(A) provides: “When a defendant who was under 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the offense for which the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment for life without the possibility of parole [(LWOP)] has been incarcerated for at least 15 years, the defendant may submit to the sentencing court a petition for recall and resentencing.” Heard held that, although subdivision (d)(1)(A) limits eligibility for recall and resentencing to juvenile offenders sentenced to explicitly designated LWOP terms, equal protection principles require that the statute also extend to juvenile offenders who were sentenced to the functional equivalent of LWOP. (Heard, supra, 83 Cal.App.5th at p. 612.)