People v. Terrell CA2/7
B337267
Cal. Ct. App.Apr 8, 2025Background
- In 1999, Damon Terrell was convicted of four counts of robbery with firearm use enhancements.
- Terrell was sentenced as a third-strike offender to 40 years to life, with a one-year prior prison term enhancement imposed and stayed under Penal Code section 667.5(b).
- The sentencing abstract did not reflect the stayed one-year enhancement, though court records did.
- In February 2024, Terrell filed a petition under Penal Code section 1172.75 (formerly 1171.1) to strike the one-year enhancement.
- The superior court denied his petition, finding Terrell was not entitled to relief as he wasn't sentenced under section 667.5(b), as reflected in the abstract of judgment.
- Terrell appealed, arguing the denial was in error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Authority to File § 1172.75 Petition | Only CDCR may initiate resentencing under § 1172.75 | Terrell should be entitled to relief since the enhancement was imposed | Only CDCR/county can initiate; defendant has no authority |
| Enhancement Imposed and Stayed | Denial proper as abstract shows no enhancement | Enhancement was imposed and stayed, but not included in the abstract | Enhancement was imposed, but denial still proper—procedure issue |
| Jurisdiction of Court | No jurisdiction as no CDCR initiation | Jurisdiction exists due to enhancement imposed | Court lacks jurisdiction absent CDCR referral |
| Remedy for Abstract Error | Correction not proper in this appeal | Abstract needs correction so CDCR is informed | Remedy is filing for correction in superior court, not this appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. King, 77 Cal.App.5th 629 (Cal. Ct. App. 2022) (trial courts lack jurisdiction to modify sentences after execution begins unless specifically allowed by statute)
- People v. Mitchell, 26 Cal.4th 181 (Cal. 2001) (appellate courts may order correction of abstract of judgment if it does not reflect oral pronouncement)