Amaya

In 2008, defendant Albert Amaya was found guilty of attempted extortion; two strike priors were found true, and defendant was sentenced, under the “Three Strikes” law as it then stood, to 25 years to life in prison. A gang allegation was also found true, but it had no effect on the total sentence, and it was not reflected in the abstract of judgment.

In 2013, defendant petitioned for resentencing under Proposition 36. Because of the gang finding, he was not actually eligible for resentencing. Nevertheless, the prosecutor, defense counsel, and even the clerk all mistakenly assured the trial court that the gang finding had been stricken. The trial court therefore resentenced him to less than the time he had already served, and he was released from prison.

One month later, the People detected the mistake. Defendant was hauled back into court and re-resentenced to 25 years to life.

Defendant — understandably—appeals, claiming that the trial court had no authority to vacate the reduced sentence. The People respond that the trial court had such authority because the reduced sentence was both unauthorized and void. We cannot say that the reduced sentence was unauthorized,…