People v. Chamizo

Filed 2/27/19 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C086712

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 14F07222)

v.

JARRETT EDWARD CHAMIZO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Jaime R. Roman, Judge. Dismissed.

Allan E. Junker, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Gerald A. Engler, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Michael A. Canzoneri, George M. Hendrickson, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

1

THE APPEAL In 2015, defendant, Jarrett Edward Chamizo, pleaded no contest to transporting cocaine and admitted a prior conviction for transporting methamphetamine and a prior conviction for possessing cocaine for sale. Defendant was thereafter sentenced on the charge of transporting cocaine and, pursuant to section 11370.2 of the Health and Safety Code (statutory section references that follow are to the Health and Safety Code unless otherwise set forth), he was ordered to serve two additional and consecutive three-year terms based upon the prior convictions. Defendant did not appeal the judgment and it became final in 2015. In 2017, the Legislature amended section 11370.2 to narrow the crimes to which the three-year enhancement applies effective January 1, 2018. Under the new statute the sentence enhancement provided for by section 11370.2 would not apply to defendant based on his conviction for transporting cocaine. In December 2017, defendant filed a motion in the trial court to reduce his sentence by striking the two three-year enhancements. Finding that the legislation amending section 11370.2 did not have retroactive application to those defendants whose judgments were final before the effective date of the amended statute, the trial court denied his motion. Defendant appeals. We hold that, since the defendant’s 2015 judgment was final at the time he filed his motion for resentencing, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the motion. We dismiss the appeal because it comes to us from a nonappealable order.