The People v. Watts CA3

BACKGROUND

When defendant initially appeared for the resentencing hearing, the trial court informed defendant that CDCR identified a sentencing error. The trial court then said: “[T]hey pointed out correctly that you were convicted of dissuading . . . a witness by force, and that requires under the Code a full consecutive middle term, not on a one-third middle consecutive term. It makes a difference of two years, but I’m required to impose that additional time, at least as [CDCR] has interpreted that, and that’s how I have interpreted it. [¶] You are here without an attorney. If you want to have consultation with an attorney, I’m very happy to give you that opportunity. In my opinion, it’s a legal issue that is, -- I don’t have discretion. I have to impose the additional two-year period, but there may be a different view on this.” Defendant said he wanted counsel, and the trial court appointed counsel for the resentencing hearing. The matter was continued until 1:30 p.m. that day so defendant could speak with his attorney. When the hearing reconvened at 1:30 p.m., the trial court said to defense counsel: “[Y]ou understand the circumstances, based upon the letter from [CDCR],…