In Re Smith

OPINION The People appeal from an order of the superior court ending Ernest Smith's parole on the ground that he had completed his parole requirements. The People argue that the procedure by which the superior court issued its order was defective, and, substantively, that Smith must remain on parole because he has not satisfied the time requirements of his parole term. We will affirm the order. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND The facts and procedural background in this case are undisputed. Smith was convicted in 1980 of committing second degree murder earlier that year. In 2001, the then named Board of Prison Terms 1 (hereinafter parole board) and that board's review committee found Smith eligible for parole. ( In re Smith (2003) 114 Cal.App.4th 343 , 349 , 351 [ 7 Cal.Rptr.3d 655 ].) The parole board set Smith's base term of imprisonment for the murder at 20 years. ( Id. at p. 356.) The Governor, as authorized by statute, reversed the parole board's decision. (Pen. Code, § 3041.2 .) The superior court granted a petition for writ of habeas corpus by Smith challenging the Governor's decision, and ordered him released forthwith. In 2003, we reversed the superior court's order…