People v. Alvarez CA4/3

Filed 1/9/24 P. v. Alvarez 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G062085

v. (Super. Ct. No. 12NF1512)

JOEL ALVAREZ, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gary S. Paer, Judge. Affirmed. Marilee Marshall, 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 and Melissa Mandel, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Following a recommendation from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, the trial court recalled appellant’s sentence and resentenced him. Although appellant’s new prison term is five years less than his original sentence, he contends the court erred by not reducing his sentence another fifteen years. We disagree and affirm the judgment. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Appellant was charged with committing carjacking and second degree robbery on separate occasions in 2012. (Pen. Code, §§ 215, subd. (a), 211, 212.5, subd. 1 (c).) It was also alleged he committed those crimes for the benefit of a criminal street gang and had served two prior prison terms. (§§ 186.22, subd. (b), 667.5, subd. (b).) In addition, appellant was accused of having previously suffered six strike convictions and four serious felony convictions. (§§ 667, subds. (a)(1), (d), (e)(2)(A), 1170.12, subds. (b), (c)(2)(A).) After appellant pleaded not guilty, the prosecutor agreed to dismiss one of his prior strike convictions. However, because he was still facing an indeterminate prison term of 70 years to life, appellant asked the trial court for further leniency. Over the prosecutor’s objection, the court agreed to dismiss four of appellant’s remaining strike convictions and sentence him as a second strike offender to 30 years in prison. That term consisted of 10 years for the robbery, plus 5 years for each of the 4 prior serious felony convictions. The court also agreed to run appellant’s 22-year sentence in a separate drug case concurrently with the 30-year term. In exchange, appellant, then age 33, pleaded guilty to the charges and admitted all of the remaining enhancement allegations. Five years later, in 2022, the Secretary of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (Secretary) sent a letter to the sentencing judge. The purpose of the letter was to provide the judge with authority to resentence appellant pursuant to section