People v. McNorton CA2/6

Filed 4/2/24 P. v. McNorton CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B327276 (Super. Ct. No. 18CR11070) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Santa Barbara County)

v.

DEJUAN ANTHONY MCNORTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Dejuan Anthony McNorton1 appeals from a resentencing order pursuant to Penal Code2 section 1172.75. McNorton contends, and the Attorney General concedes, that upon

1 The record on appeal includes three different spellings of McNorton’s first name. We will use the spelling used in the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation records and the appellant’s briefs. 2 Further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code.

resentencing, the trial court erred in delegating recalculation of McNorton’s custody credits to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR). We agree and reverse. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In August 2019, McNorton pleaded no contest to kidnapping. (§ 207.) He also admitted one prior strike allegation (§§ 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12) and two prior prison term allegations (§ 667.5, subd. (b)). The trial court sentenced him to 12 years in state prison (middle term of five years for kidnapping, doubled for the prior strike, plus two consecutive one-year terms for the prior prison enhancements). After he was sentenced, the Legislature passed section 1172.75, which provides: “Any sentence enhancement that was imposed prior to January 1, 2020, pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 667.5 . . . is legally invalid.” (§ 1172.75, subd. (a).) In March 2023, the trial court recalled McNorton’s sentence pursuant to section 1172.75. It struck the two invalid prior prison term enhancements (§ 667.5, subd. (b)) and resentenced McNorton to 10 years in state prison. The court issued an amended abstract of judgment directing the CDCR “to re-calculate credits.”3 DISCUSSION McNorton contends, and the Attorney General concedes, that the trial court erred in delegating recalculation of McNorton’s custody credits to the CDCR and that the court should have calculated his custody credits. We agree.