People v. Newels CA2/5

Filed 8/28/25 P. v. Newels CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B331800

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. YA064635)

BRIAN KEITH NEWELS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Laura C. Ellison, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Esther R. Sorkin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Gary A. Lieberman, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

The trial court recalled the sentence of defendant and appellant Brian Keith Newels (defendant) and struck two one- year prior prison term enhancements imposed pursuant to Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b).1 The court later held a full resentencing hearing and declined to modify defendant’s sentence in any other way. Defendant appeals, arguing the trial court abused its discretion in declining to reduce his sentence further. The Attorney General maintains we need not decide that issue because a clerical error infected the resentencing proceedings and requires remand for resentencing regardless of the merits of defendant’s contentions. He’s right about that.

I. BACKGROUND A. Charges, Conviction, and Sentencing In 2007, the Los Angeles County District Attorney filed a three-count second amended information against defendant charging him with attempted murder (with a further allegation that defendant personally inflicted great bodily injury), arson causing great bodily injury, and second degree robbery. The information additionally alleged defendant had suffered four prior convictions pursuant to Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b), and that he had suffered five prior serious felony convictions. A jury found defendant guilty of attempted murder and arson causing great bodily injury, and found as to the attempted murder count that defendant personally inflicted great bodily injury. It acquitted defendant on the charge of second degree