People v. Arellano CA2/7

Filed 1/26/22 P. v. Arellano CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, B314434

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA112598) v.

EDGAR ARELLANO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Juan Carlos Dominguez, Judge. Affirmed. Edgar Arellano, in pro. per., and Richard B. Lennon, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

________________

Edgar Arellano, sentenced in January 2017 pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement to state prison for 22 years for first degree burglary with prior conviction enhancements, petitioned for resentencing pursuant to Senate Bill No. 1393 (Stats. 2018, ch. 1013, §§ 1 & 2) (Senate Bill 1393), which, effective January 1, 2019, allowed the trial court to exercise its discretion under Penal Code section 13881 to strike or dismiss section 667, subdivision (a), prior serious felony enhancements. The superior court denied Arellano’s petition, ruling Senate Bill 1393 was not retroactive and, in any event, did not apply when the defendant had agreed in a negotiated plea to a specific prison term that included those enhancements. We reversed the order denying Arellano’s petition based on People v. Stamps (2020) 9 Cal.5th 685 (Stamps), decided while Arellano’s appeal was pending, and remanded the matter to provide Arellano the opportunity to ask the superior court to exercise its discretion not to impose the prior serious felony enhancements and, if the request was made, for the parties and the court to follow the procedure approved in Stamps. (People v. Arellano (Sept. 14, 2020, B300847) [nonpub. opn.].) On remand the superior court, after denying Arellano’s request to change his appointed counsel pursuant to People v. Marsden (1970) 2 Cal.3d 118, denied Arellano’s request to strike the prior serious felony enhancements, stating, in view of the seriousness of the current offense and Arellano’s criminal history, Arellano was “extremely fortunate that he received the sentence that he received.”