People v. Rubish CA5
F087241
| Cal. Ct. App. | Nov 20, 2024Background
- Robert Rubish was serving a 25-years-to-life sentence for battery upon a nonconfined person, with enhancement for a prior prison term, under California's Three Strikes law.
- In 2022, following legislative changes invalidating certain sentence enhancements (pursuant to Senate Bill 483 and Penal Code § 1172.75), Rubish became eligible for resentencing after CDCR notice.
- At resentencing, defense counsel requested the court strike Rubish’s current conviction under Romero, and consideration under the Three Strikes Reform Act, but the trial court denied relief, limiting its review to invalidating the enhancement.
- The trial court did not revisit whether to strike one or more prior felony convictions as potential strikes, nor did it order a supplemental report on Rubish’s institutional record.
- Rubish appealed, arguing lack of consideration of full resentencing discretion under § 1172.75, ineffective assistance of counsel, and cumulative due process violations.
- The appellate court found the trial court failed to exercise its full resentencing discretion and remanded for a new resentencing hearing.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope of Resentencing under § 1172.75 | Court properly struck only the invalid enhancement | Entitled to full resentencing, not just striking enhancement | Remand: trial court must conduct full resentencing |
| Discretion to Strike Prior Felony Convictions | No duty to revisit prior strike decisions | Court should have considered striking prior strikes under Romero | Remand: court must consider striking prior felonies under Romero |
| Ineffective Assistance of Counsel (IAC) | No entitlement to relief | Counsel’s error prejudiced Rubish by failing to pursue correct Romero relief | Moot (issue not addressed due to remand for full resentencing) |
| Cumulative Due Process Violations | No cumulative error | Cumulative errors deprived Rubish of due process | Moot (issue not addressed due to remand for full resentencing) |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Superior Court (Romero), 13 Cal.4th 497 (Cal. 1996) (establishes courts’ authority to strike prior felony convictions in the interest of justice under Three Strikes law)
- People v. Carmony, 33 Cal.4th 367 (Cal. 2004) (articulates standards for trial courts when considering a motion to strike prior convictions)
- People v. Williams, 17 Cal.4th 148 (Cal. 1998) (discusses factors to be considered in Romero motions)
- People v. Gutierrez, 58 Cal.4th 1354 (Cal. 2014) (requires remand if trial court failed to exercise informed sentencing discretion)
- People v. Salazar, 15 Cal.5th 416 (Cal. 2023) (remand required unless clear indication trial court considered full sentencing discretion)