People v. London CA3

Filed 3/4/26 P. v. London CA3 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Yuba) ----

THE PEOPLE, C099987

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF99- 0000381) v. OPINION ON TRANSFER MICHAEL EUGENE LONDON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Michael Eugene London was originally sentenced in June 2000. His sentence included an indeterminate term of 25 years to life in prison pursuant to the three strikes statutory scheme then in place, and five prior prison term enhancements imposed under Penal Code section 667.5, subdivision (b).1 The Legislature recently limited the circumstances in which these enhancements apply, and defendant was resentenced

1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

pursuant to section 1172.75 (described in more detail, post) in November 2023. Defendant appeals from his resentencing. He argues he is entitled to a new resentencing because the trial court failed to apply relevant provisions of the Three Strikes Reform Act of 2012 (Reform Act or Act) (Prop. 36, as approved by voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 6, 2012)) to reduce his sentence beyond merely striking the section 667.5, subdivision (b) enhancements. On November 21, 2025, a divided panel of this court issued an unpublished opinion rejecting defendant’s claim and affirming the judgment. Defendant petitioned for review; our Supreme Court granted review and deferred the matter pending consideration and disposition of a related issue in People v. Superior Court (Guevara) 18 Cal.5th 838 (Guevara). On December 17, 2025, the Supreme Court transferred the matter back to us with directions to vacate our decision and reconsider the cause in light of Guevara. We vacated our earlier decision on December 22, 2025. We now vacate defendant’s sentence and remand the matter for a full resentencing. BACKGROUND “On May 24, 2000, a jury found defendant guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm (former § 12021, subd. (a)(1), renumbered § 29800, subd. (a)(1)) and being a felon in possession of ammunition (§ 12316, subd. (b)(1), renumbered § 30305, subd. (a)(1)). The trial court found true allegations that defendant had two prior serious felony convictions (§§ 667, subds. (d), (e); 1170.12, subds. (b), (c)) and had served five prior prison terms (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The court sentenced defendant to a prison term of 25 years to life, plus five years for the prior prison term counts. “On May 29, 2013, defendant filed a petition to recall his sentence under the Act. The trial court denied the petition, ruling defendant’s conviction for possessing a firearm rendered him ineligible for resentencing.” (People v. London (July 26, 2016, C074615) [nonpub. opn.] (London I).) Defendant appealed from the order denying his petition and