People v. Recarte CA2/4

Filed 11/24/25 P. v. Recarte CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B337907

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. VA106973) v.

XAVIER RECARTE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Micheal E. Pastor, Judge. Affirmed. Miriam K. Billington, 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, Assistant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Steven E. Mercer, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant Xavier Recarte was sentenced to a prison term of 40 years to life for two counts of murder he committed when he was 17 years old. Recarte petitioned for recall and resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (d)(1).1 The trial court denied his petition, finding he was ineligible for relief because he was not sentenced to the functional equivalent of life without the possibility of parole (LWOP). Recarte contends the court erred and the denial of his petition violated his constitutional right to equal protection of the law. We affirm.

PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2012, a jury convicted Recarte of two counts of second degree murder. (§ 187, subd. (a).) The jury also found true the allegation that Recarte committed the crimes to benefit a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(c)). The trial court sentenced Recarte to consecutive indeterminate terms of 20 years to life, for a total term of 40 years to life in state prison. We affirmed the judgment on direct appeal. (People v. Recarte (June 17, 2014, B245867) [nonpub. opn.].) In 2024, Recarte filed a petition for recall and resentencing under section 1170, subdivision (d)(1). Recarte argued that he was 17 years old at the time of the crimes and that he had been incarcerated for more than 15 years. Relying on People v. Heard (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 608 (Heard), defendant argued that he was entitled to relief because he had been sentenced to the functional equivalent of LWOP and satisfied the other criteria for resentencing. The People opposed the petition. The trial court denied the petition.