People v. Fuller CA2/1
B337248
Cal. Ct. App.May 27, 2025Background
- Tyrone Fuller was convicted of first degree residential burglary in 1996 and received a 45-years-to-life sentence, with several sentence enhancements including four prior prison term enhancements under Penal Code § 667.5(b), which were imposed but stayed.
- In 2022, CDCR identified Fuller as eligible for resentencing because his sentence included § 667.5(b) enhancements, which had since been declared invalid for non-sexually violent offenses.
- The trial court denied resentencing, holding that because Fuller’s § 667.5(b) enhancements were stayed (not executed), resentencing under Penal Code § 1172.75 was unavailable.
- Fuller appealed, arguing that § 1172.75 applies to any imposed § 667.5(b) enhancement, even those stayed, not just executed ones.
- The appellate courts have been divided on whether a stayed enhancement qualifies a defendant for resentencing, and the Supreme Court has granted review of the issue.
- The Court of Appeal here adopts the majority position, reverses the denial, and remands for resentencing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does § 1172.75 apply to stayed § 667.5(b) enhancements? | Only executed enhancements qualify | Stayed enhancements also qualify | Applies to stayed enhancements; reversal |
| Entitlement to resentencing when enhancements invalidated | Denied because enhancements were stayed | Entitled because enhancements were imposed | Entitled to resentencing hearing |
| Proper interpretation of "imposed" in § 1172.75 | Imposed means imposed and executed | Imposed means imposed, regardless of stay | Imposed includes imposed and stayed |
| Precedential effect of split authority among lower courts | Favors narrow Rhodius interpretation | Favors broader Bravo and similar cases | Follows the weight of authority |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Jennings, 42 Cal.App.5th 664 (Cal. Ct. App. 2019) (explaining historical operation of § 667.5(b) and legislative amendments)
- People v. Renteria, 96 Cal.App.5th 1276 (Cal. Ct. App. 2023) (Attorney General conceded, and court held, that full resentencing required when invalid enhancement present)
- People v. Bravo, 107 Cal.App.5th 1144 (Cal. Ct. App. 2025) (holding § 1172.75 applies to stayed § 667.5(b) enhancements)
- People v. Mayberry, 102 Cal.App.5th 665 (Cal. Ct. App. 2024) (same)