People v. Fields CA3

Filed 7/13/22 P. v. Fields CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Shasta) ----

THE PEOPLE, C095123

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 16F7936)

v.

KENNETH LEE FIELDS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Kenneth Lee Fields appeals from the trial court’s order denying his petition to strike his prior prison term enhancement pursuant to newly enacted Senate Bill No. 483 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 728 § 3 (Senate Bill 483)). We conclude defendant has appealed from a nonappealable order. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal.

1

BACKGROUND The substantive facts do not bear on our decision here. In 2017, defendant pleaded no contest in case No. 16F7936 to residential burglary and grand theft. He admitted a prior strike conviction and a prior prison term. Defendant also pleaded no contest in case No. 17F239 to second degree burglary and admitted a prior strike conviction. On August 18, 2017, the trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate term of 11 years eight months. The sentence included a one-year prior prison term enhancement pursuant to Penal Code former section 667.5, subdivision (b).1 Defendant’s judgment became final on October 17, 2017. On April 21, 2021, defendant filed a one-page petition for modification of his sentence citing section 1170, subdivision (d)(1). The trial court denied the petition. On September 29, 2021, defendant petitioned for resentencing pursuant to Senate Bill 483. The trial court denied the petition as duplicative of the April 2021 petition. Defendant appeals from that order. DISCUSSION As a threshold issue, we must determine whether we have jurisdiction to hear this appeal. We do not. (People v. King (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 629, 634 (King).) The right to appeal is entirely statutory. (People v. Clark (2021) 67 Cal.App.5th 248, 254.) As relevant here, an order following judgment is only appealable if it affects a defendant’s substantial rights. (§ 1237, subd. (b).) Generally, subject to certain statutory exceptions, a trial court is deprived of jurisdiction to resentence a criminal defendant once execution of the sentence has commenced. (People v. Pillsbury (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 776, 784.) Section 1171.1 is a statutory exception to that general rule.