People v. Littlefield CA4/1

Filed 9/17/25 P. v. Littlefield CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D086152

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No.RIF1313733)

RONALD JAMES LITTLEFIELD,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Riverside County, Joshlyn R. Pulliam, Judge. Dismissed. Laura Vavakin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Arlene A. Sevidal, and Christopher P. Beesley, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Ronald James Littlefield purports to appeal the order denying his request under Penal Code section 1172.1 that the trial court recall the

sentence it had imposed several years earlier and resentence him. The order is not appealable. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. BACKGROUND In December 2015, the trial court sentenced Littlefield to prison for four years four months, plus 195 years to life after a jury found him guilty of 10 sex crimes against one minor and five against another. This court affirmed the judgment. (People v. Littlefield (Feb. 26, 2018, D073015) [nonpub. opn.].) In September 2024, Littlefield filed a form request for recall and resentencing under section 1172.1. He checked boxes on the form stating that statutes that applied when he was sentenced had changed. As grounds for relief, Littlefield alleged that when he was a child, his parents neglected him and his uncle abused him sexually, psychologically, and physically; his risk of committing another sex crime was low according to psychological and risk assessments; and he had realistic parole plans and knew how to identify and stop “triggers.” The trial court issued a minute order denying the request. The order stated: “Denied 1172.1(c) improper format.” Littlefield filed a timely notice of appeal from the order. (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.308(a).) DISCUSSION Littlefield challenges the trial court’s order denying his request for recall of sentence and resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.1 (subsequent section references are to this code) on the ground the court misunderstood its authority to grant relief based on changes in sentencing laws that occurred after he was sentenced. He acknowledges that under the statute he had no right to initiate the resentencing process and the trial court