People v. Sewell CA3

Filed 10/30/25 P. v. Sewell CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT

(Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C101805

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 08F04953)

v.

MICHAEL DAVID SEWELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Michael David Sewell was convicted in 2008 of criminal threats and battery. The trial court sentenced him to 25 years to life plus six years in prison. He currently appeals from a 2024 resentencing order that struck a now-invalid prior prison term enhancement but otherwise left his sentence unchanged. He contends the trial court abused its discretion in declining to reduce the sentence further and that the restitution fine must be vacated. We vacate the restitution fine and otherwise affirm. Statutory references are to the Penal Code. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant was charged with two counts of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), criminal threats (§ 422), and misdemeanor battery (§ 242). As to the first assault count, the People alleged defendant inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7, subd. (a)). The People also alleged four prior conviction enhancements (former §667.5,

1

subd. (b)), two prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (a)), and seven prior strikes (§§ 667, subd. (b)-(i), 1170.12). The jury found defendant guilty of criminal threats and battery but failed to reach a verdict on the assault counts, and they were dismissed. The trial court found true the nine prior conviction allegations, including two prior strikes. It also found true the allegations that defendant served two prior prison terms. The trial court denied defendant’s Romero1 motion and sentenced him to 25 years to life for the criminal threats charge, five years for the prior serious felony enhancement (§ 667, subd. (a)), one year for the prior prison term enhancement (former § 667.5, subd. (b)), and time served for the battery count. Defendant appealed and another panel of this court affirmed the judgment. (People v. Sewell (May 10, 2010, C060587) [nonpub. opn.].) In 2024, the trial court received notice from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation that defendant was eligible for resentencing under section 1172.75. Defendant filed a resentencing brief requesting the trial court dismiss the now- invalid prior prison term enhancement (former § 667.5, subd. (b)) pursuant to section 1172.75, the five-year serious conviction enhancement (§ 667.5, subd. (a)) pursuant to section 1385, subdivision (c), and the prior strike convictions (§§ 667, subd. (b)-(i), 1170.12) pursuant to Romero and section 1385, subdivision (a). At the resentencing hearing, defendant argued he was no longer a risk of danger to society because of his rehabilitative efforts in prison, lack of major disciplinary actions, and the amount of time he had already served on the sentence. The People conceded only that the trial court must strike the now-invalid prior prison term enhancement and argued the court should not further reduce defendant’s sentence, citing his convictions for violent felonies. After considering the parties’ briefs, exhibits, the probation report, and