Tindall

In this case, we decide the question left open in People v. Valladoli (1996) 13 Cal.4th 590, 608 , footnote 4, 54 Cal.Rptr.2d 695 , 918 P.2d 999 ( Valladoli ): whether a postverdict amendment to an information to add prior conviction allegations is permissible before sentencing but after the jury has been discharged. Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude it is not permissible. Under Penal Code section 1025, subdivision (b), [1] a defendant has the statutory right to have the same jury decide both the issue of guilt and the truth of any prior conviction allegations. Because the jury in this case was discharged before the prosecution amended the information to add additional priors, defendant did not have the same jury, as required under section 1025, subdivision (b). We conclude the trial court acted in excess of its jurisdiction by permitting the postdischarge amendment to the information. Thus, we reverse the Court of Appeal's judgment affirming that order.

The facts are taken largely from the Court of Appeal's opinion.

Police arrested defendant Robert Tindall after they saw him drop a plastic baggie containing what was later determined to be a usable…