Opinion
C085151
07-25-2018
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. THOMAS MICHAEL DIXON, Defendant and Appellant.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. NRC98273)
Defendant, Thomas Michael Dixon, appeals from a judgment entered after his guilty plea to second degree murder (Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a)) with a firearm enhancement (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)) and stipulation to serve a prison sentence of 19 years to life. Defendant argues the recent amendment of section 3051 extending youthful offender parole hearings to individuals who committed the controlling offense at the age of 25 or younger, entitles him to remand to the trial court for the limited purpose of determining whether he has had an adequate opportunity to present evidence relevant to that parole hearing and to present such evidence if the court determines he did not. The People concur defendant is entitled to limited remand for these purposes.
Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.
Defendant was charged with murder and a firearm enhancement (personal and intentional discharge of a firearm), both with sentencing ranges of 25 years to life. The plea agreement shows 15 years to life for second degree murder and 4 years to life for the firearm enhancement. On October 11, 2017, the Governor signed into law Senate Bill No. 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (SB 620) that amended sections 12022.5, subdivision (c), and 12022.53, subdivision (h), effective January 1, 2018 (Stats. 2017, ch. 682, §§ 1 & 2, respectively). Defendant's opening brief was filed on January 11, 2018 (after the effective date of SB 620) and no reply brief was filed. Defendant does not raise the SB 620 issue in his appeal. --------
We conclude a limited remand is required, as defendant was 25 years old at the time of the controlling offense (§ 3051, subd. (a)(1), (2)(B)) and was not previously entitled to present such evidence because the prior version of section 3051 applied to individuals aged 23 or younger. (People v. Franklin (2016) 63 Cal.4th 261, 277.)
DISPOSITION
The matter is remanded to the trial court for the limited purpose of determining whether defendant had an adequate opportunity to make a record of information that will be relevant to the Board of Parole Hearings in fulfilling its statutory obligations under Penal Code section 3051, and if not, to afford defendant and the People the opportunity to present evidence relevant to that eventual youthful offender parole hearing. The judgment is otherwise affirmed.
/s/_________
HOCH, J. We concur: /s/_________
ROBIE, Acting P. J. /s/_________
MAURO, J.