Error and/or relief
Section 1172.75 does not apply to the defendant’s death sentence. However, because the defendant was also sentenced to an indeterminate term in addition to the death sentence, and because section 1172.75 applies by its terms to this aspect of his sentence, we conclude he is entitled to resentencing of the indeterminate term only.
First Holding:
Prior to January 1, 2020, section 667.5(b) required the court to impose a one-year enhancement for each prior prison term the defendant had served, unless the defendant had remained free of custody for the preceding five years. Effective January 1, 2020, SB 136 amended section 667.5 to limit the enhancement to prior prison terms for sexually violent offenses. After SB 136 took effect, courts applied the legislation retroactively to cases that were not yet final on January 1, 2020.
Authority:
PEN 667.5(b)
People v. Garcia (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 848, 854
People v. Christianson (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 300, 309
People v. Jennings (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 664, 668
Second Holding:
After the superior court verifies a judgment includes an invalid enhancement, the court must recall the sentence and resentence the defendant.
Authority:
PEN 1172.75(c)
People v. Dixon (2025) 112 Cal.App.5th 236, 243, review granted Oct. 22, 2025, S292223
Third Holding:
By its plain terms, section 1172.75 requires a full resentencing, not merely that the trial court strike the newly invalid enhancements.
Authority:
People v. Garcia (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 848, 855
Fourth Holding:
Insofar as the defendant’s claims require us to interpret section 1172.75, they present questions of statutory interpretation and construction subject to de novo review. If the statutory language permits more than one reasonable interpretation, courts may consider other aids, such as the statute’s purpose, legislative history, and public policy.
Authority:
People v. Harring (2021) 69 Cal.App.5th 483, 495
People v. Brown (2023) 14 Cal.5th 530, 536
Fifth Holding:
[Gary Note: the opinion contains footnotes on cases that have dealt with and disagreed on the impact of section 1172.75 on those serving death sentences. The issue is complex and is pending in the California Supreme Court. The cases are listed below. I have chosen not to include the discussion or debate on that point. In this instance, the appellate concluded that section 1172.75 does not affect the death sentence but a death sentence does not render a defendant ineligible for resentencing on the indeterminate portion of the sentence.]Authority:
People v. Dixon (2025) 112 Cal.App.5th 236, review granted Oct. 22, 2025, S292223
People v. Millsap (2025) 114 Cal.App.5th 368
People v. Cain (2025) 116 Cal.App.5th 917, review granted Feb. 18, 2026, S294810