People v. Alexander

Filed 2/18/20 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B296184 (Super. Ct. No. BA428950) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

RANDOLPH DARIN ALEXANDER,

Defendant and Appellant.

In recent years, the Legislature has enacted several new laws that have either rendered formerly mandatory sentence enhancements discretionary (e.g., Senate Bill No. 1393 (Stats. 2018, ch. 1013, §§ 1, 2) [amending Penal Code1 sections 667 and 1385 to give trial courts discretion to strike prior serious felony enhancements]; Senate Bill No. 620 (Stats. 2017, ch. 682, §§ 1, 2) [amending sections 12022.5 and 12022.53 to give courts discretion to strike firearm enhancements]), or restricted the applicability of enhancements to fewer offenses (e.g., Senate Bill No. 136 (Stats. 2019, ch. 590, § 1) [amending section 667.5 to

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

restrict prior prison term enhancements to terms served for sexually violent offenses]). Courts have determined that these laws apply retroactively on appeal to nonfinal convictions. (See People v. Lopez (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 337, 340-342 [Senate Bill No. 136]; People v. Garcia (2018) 28 Cal.App.5th 961, 971-973 (Garcia) [Senate Bill No. 1393]; People v. Woods (2018) 19 Cal.App.5th 1080, 1089-1091 (Woods) [Senate Bill No. 620].) The issue presented here is whether Senate Bill No. 1393 (S.B. 1393) applies to final convictions. We conclude that it does not. Randolph Darin Alexander appeals from the trial court’s postjudgment order denying his motion for resentencing pursuant to S.B. 1393. He contends we should vacate the order and remand the case to permit the court to exercise its newfound discretion to strike the four prior serious felony enhancements to his sentence. We dismiss the appeal. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In December 2016, Alexander pled no contest to second degree robbery (§§ 211, 212.5, subd. (c)), and admitted that he suffered five prior strike convictions (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(j), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d)) and four prior serious felony convictions (§ 667, subd. (a)). The trial court struck four of the prior strikes2 and sentenced Alexander to 24 years in state prison: the low term of two years on the robbery, doubled to four years due to the remaining strike, and a consecutive 20 years for the four prior serious felony convictions. Alexander did not appeal from the judgment. In February 2019, Alexander moved for resentencing pursuant to S.B. 1393. The trial court determined that “[Senate