People v. Apoyan CA2/8

California Court of Appeal Aug 14, 2025 No. B339697Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an order denying a defendant's unauthorized petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.1 is not an appealable order because it does not implicate a defendant's substantial rights.

Issues

Whether a defendant has a right to appeal the denial of a personally filed petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.1.
Whether the denial of an unauthorized petition for resentencing under section 1172.1 affects a defendant's substantial rights under Penal Code section 1237, subdivision (b).

Disposition. dismissed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Because we find the order is not appealable, we dismiss the appeal.”

“Section 1172.1, by its terms, denies a defendant the right to petition the court for recall and resentencing.”

“We hold that section 1172.1 does not implicate a defendant’s substantial rights where, as here, a defendant has personally filed a petition not authorized by statute.”

Filed 8/14/25 P. v. Apoyan CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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(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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B339697

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA077165-01) v.

ARMEN APOYAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Joseph A. Brandolino, Judge. Appeal dismissed.

Ashwini Mate, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_______________________

Pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), we review an order denying Armen Apoyan’s motion for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.1, subdivision (a)(1). Because we find the order is not appealable, we dismiss the appeal. BACKGROUND A jury convicted appellant Armen Apoyan of willful, deliberate and premeditated murder in violation of section 187, subdivision (a). The jury also found true several firearm enhancements pursuant to subdivisions (b) through (d) of section 12022.53. On November 8, 2018, the trial court sentenced Apoyan to 50 years to life in prison, consisting of 25 years to life for the murder and a consecutive 25 years to life for the firearm enhancement under section 12022.53, subdivision (d). The trial court declined to strike the firearm enhancement, finding it was not in the interest of justice to do so. The remaining enhancements were not imposed or were stricken. On June 5, 2024, Apoyan filed a petition for recall and resentencing pursuant to section 1172.1, subdivision (a)(1). He asked the trial court to exercise its discretion to strike the 25- year-to-life firearm enhancement pursuant to Senate Bill No. 620. On June 21, 2024, the trial court found that because Apoyan’s sentencing took place after the effective date of Senate Bill No. 620, there was no change in the law warranting recall and resentencing under section 1172.1. The court denied Apoyan’s request for resentencing. The trial court’s order stated: “The Court has received and reviewed defendant Armen Apoyan’s

People v. Apoyan CA2/8

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B339697

ARMEN APOYAN,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

STRATTON, P. J.

WILEY, J.

VIRAMONTES, J.

AI Brief