People v. Armendariz CA6

Filed 8/22/25 P. v. Armendariz CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H052869 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. SS032624A)

v.

ROBERT TINO ARMENDARIZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury convicted defendant Robert Tino Armendariz in 2004 of first degree murder and dissuading a witness by force or threat. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 111 years to life in prison. In 2024, Armendariz filed a “Request for Recall of Sentence and Resentencing” pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.1.1 Based on subdivision (c) of that statute, the trial court declined to respond to the request. Armendariz appealed. We conclude that the trial court’s decision not to respond to Armendariz’s request for recall and resentencing under section 1172.1 does not constitute an appealable order because the trial court’s decision did not affect Armendariz’s substantial rights under section 1237, subdivision (b). We therefore will dismiss the appeal.

1 Unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2 A jury convicted Armendariz of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)) and dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)). The jury found true an allegation that Armendariz used a deadly and dangerous weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)) with respect to the latter offense. The trial court then found true allegations that Armendariz had two prior strike convictions (§ 1170.12, subd. (c)(2)) and two prior serious felony convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). The trial court imposed a total sentence of 111 years to life. This court affirmed the judgment in 2005. (People v. Armendariz (Sept. 6, 2005, H028176) [nonpub. opn.].) In March 2024, Armendariz filed a pro se request for recall and resentencing under section 1172.1. The trial court noted the following on a “Request for Action” form: “The court declines to respond, pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.1(c).” Armendariz did not appeal. In October 2024, Armendariz again requested recall and resentencing under section 1172.1, asking the trial court to apply various changes in sentencing laws that took effect after his sentencing hearing. Again, the trial court responded as follows: “The court declines to respond pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.1(c).” Armendariz appealed. This court ordered Armendariz to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed as taken from a nonappealable order, and Armendariz responded. He then submitted a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, stating the case and facts but raising no issues. II. DISCUSSION A. Legal Principles In 2023, the Legislature passed Assembly Bill No. 600 (2023-2024 Reg. Sess.), amending section 1172.1 to grant trial courts the authority to initiate recall and