People v. Bolden CA4/3

Filed 5/10/23 P. v. Bolden CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G061114

v. (Super. Ct. No. 06WF0473)

FREDERICK RANNEL BOLDEN, OPI NION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Cheri T. Pham, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Aaron Spolin, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina, Christine L. Bergman and Kelley Johnson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

INTRODUCTION Appellant Frederick Rannell Bolden appeals a denial of his postjudgment motion for a hearing, pursuant to People v. Franklin (2016) 63 Cal.4th 261 (Franklin), to preserve youth-related evidence that will be relevant to any parole hearing he receives in the future. Bolden was 23 years old when he committed the crimes central to this appeal and, because of earlier convictions, was sentenced pursuant to the Three Strikes Law. Although the trial court correctly concluded a “third strike” offender is ineligible for the sought hearing pursuant to Penal Code section 3051 (all further undesignated statutory references are to this code), the Attorney General agrees with Bolden on appeal that youthful offenders ineligible under that section should nevertheless be entitled to a proceeding to preserve evidence for a future parole hearing, pursuant to a related legislative provision, section 4801, subdivision (c). We agree, reverse the denial order, and remand the matter with directions.