People v. Farias CA4/1

Filed 8/4/25 P. v. Farias CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D083966

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCS249301)

JESUS FARIAS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, David J. Danielsen, Judge. (Retired Judge of the S.D. Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Affirmed. Gerald J. Miller, under the appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney general, Charles C. Ragland, A. Natasha Cortina and Christine Levingston Bergman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

In 2012, Jesus Farias pleaded guilty to one count of voluntary

manslaughter (Pen. Code § 192, subd. (a)).2 He also admitted allegations that he used a handgun in connection with the offense (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)) and had one prison prior for car theft (§ 667.5, former subd. (b) [as amended to limit prison priors by Stats. 2019, ch. 590, § 1].) Farias stipulated to a 22- year sentence comprised of the 11-year upper term for his manslaughter conviction (§ 193, subd. (a)), a consecutive 10-year upper term for the firearm allegation (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)), and a consecutive one-year enhancement for the prison prior (former § 667.5, subd. (b)). This sentence was imposed on August 2012. Farias remains in custody. When Farias was sentenced, section 667.5, former subdivision (b) required the imposition of “a one-year enhancement for any nonviolent felony for which a prison sentence was imposed, unless the defendant remained free of custody for at least five years after completing that sentence.” (People v. Espino (2024) 104 Cal.App.5th 188, 194.) But since January 1, 2020, only prison priors involving “sexually violent offense[s]” may be used to enhance a sentence. (Id. at p. 195; Stats. 2019, ch. 590, § 1.) The Legislature has also deemed “legally invalid[]” any sentence imposed before January 2020 that— like Farias’s—was enhanced by a prison prior for other than a sexually violent offense. (§ 1172.75, subd. (a).) A court must recall such a sentence and resentence the defendant under current laws. (Id., subds. (b)–(d).) This resentencing “shall result in a lesser sentence than the one originally