People v. Williams CA4/1

DISCUSSION

We agree with the parties that Williams is entitled to a full resentencing, as his case is not yet final and while his appeal was pending there have been various changes in the determinate sentencing laws that

may3 apply to him. (In re Estrada (1965) 63 Cal.2d 740, 745 [when ameliorative legislation goes into effect, we generally presume the Legislature intends the benefits of the new enactment to apply as broadly as constitutionally permissible to all nonfinal cases]; People v. Esquivel (2021) 11 Cal.5th 671, 679 [the test for finality is “whether the criminal prosecution or proceeding as a whole is complete” (italics added)].) In addition, we conclude that at resentencing the trial court may reconsider the fees, fines, and assessments it previously imposed. We note the decision in People v. Dueñas (2019) 30 Cal.App.5th 1157, 1164, which held that a sentencing court should consider a criminal defendant’s ability to pay, was decided after Williams’ sentencing; and the issue of whether a court must consider a defendant’s ability to pay is currently pending before the Supreme Court. (People v. Kopp (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 47, review granted Nov. 13, 2019, S257844.)

…