California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
Cal.Rptr.3d 531] APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court
of San Diego County, Keri G. Katz, Judge. Affirmed. (Super.
Ct. No. SCS243881)
Dominick Humphrey, in pro. per.; John L. Staley, San Diego
under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and
Becerra, Attorney General, Kristen Ramirez and Daniel Hilton,
Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Acting P. J.
August 8, 2011, Dominick Humphrey pled guilty to four counts
of robbery (Pen. Code, § 211; counts 2, 3, 4, and 24). For
three of these counts (counts 2, 3, and 4), Humphrey admitted
that he used a deadly weapon (a knife) during the commission
of the offenses within the meaning of section 12022,
subdivision (b)(1) and used a firearm during the commission
of one of the counts (count 24) within the meaning of section
12022.5, subdivision (a). Humphrey also admitted that he was
16 years old when he committed the crimes within the meaning
of Welfare and Institutions Code section 707.
October 14, 2011, the trial court sentenced Humphrey to
prison for 19 years, consisting of: (1) for count 24, the
upper term of five years plus a consecutive 10-year term for
the firearm enhancement; (2) for counts 2, 3, and 4,
consecutive one-year terms for each count; and (3)
consecutive four month terms for the deadly weapons
enhancements for counts 2, 3, and 4.
November 22, 2017, five years into Humphreys sentence, an
employee of the California Department of Corrections and
Rehabilitation (CDCR) wrote a letter to the superior court,
stating that the abstract of judgment "may be in error,
or incomplete[.]" On March 29, 2018, the trial court
clarified that Humphrey was sentenced to 15 years for count
24 and the associated firearm enhancement and consecutive
16-month terms for counts 2, 3, and 4 (including their deadly
weapon enhancements). [257 Cal.Rptr.3d 532] An amended
abstract of judgment was issued showing a sentence of 19
years in state prison.
April 30, 2018, Humphrey filed a motion to strike the firearm
enhancement under Senate Bill No. 620. The trial court denied
the motion because Humphreys conviction became final before
the enactment of Senate Bill No. 620.
Humphrey timely filed a notice of appeal.
counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende
(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 158 Cal.Rptr. 839, 600 P.2d 1071,
indicating that he had not been able to identify any arguable
issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asked this court to
review the record for error as mandated by Wende. In
reviewing the record, we discovered an issue to be briefed.
As such, we requested the parties brief whether the trial
court erred in finding Humphrey ineligible for relief under
Senate Bill No. 620 after the court acted to correct the
abstract of judgment.
parties filed the requested letter briefs.
Humphreys sentencing hearing on October 14, 2011, the trial
court stated that it had reviewed the stipulated change of
plea form and sentence, the probation report, the stipulated
sentence report, and a "brief memo" regarding
restitution. The court commented that it believed the correct
sentence to be 19 years, not the 19 years four months set
forth in ...