People v. Bell CA2/1

Filed 11/26/25 P. v. Bell CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, B337354

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA350562) v.

RONNIE O’NEIL BELL,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mark Hanasono, Judge. Sentence vacated and appeal dismissed. Marta I. Stanton, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven E. Mercer and Noah P. Hill, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 In 2010, the trial court sentenced defendant and appellant Ronnie O’Neil Bell to an aggregate term of 35 years to life in prison after a jury convicted him of two counts of second degree robbery (Pen. Code, § 211),2 one count of assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), and one count of carjacking (§ 215, subd. (a)). The sentence included a one-year enhancement under section 667.5, subdivision (b) for a prior prison term based on Bell’s 1987 conviction on seven felony counts, including one count of forcible rape (former § 261, subd. (2)).3 In 2019, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill No. 136 (2019- 2020 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2019, ch. 590), which eliminated the one- year enhancement for prior prison terms under section 667.5, subdivision (b) except in the case of defendants whose prior prison term was imposed for a sexually violent offense. Two years later, the Legislature enacted section 1172.75,4 which declared all existing enhancements imposed under section 667.5, subdivision (b) invalid except when the enhancement was imposed for a prior conviction for a sexually violent offense, and created a mechanism for eliminating the invalid enhancements