King

*31 Opinion

Both People v. Bunn (2002) 27 Cal.4th 1 [ 115 Cal.Rptr.2d 192 , 37 P.3d 380 ] (Bunn), and this case involve successive versions of a law increasing the time for prosecuting sex crimes against minors, and allowing the refiling of accusatory pleadings previously dismissed as time-barred by the courts. (Pen. Code, § 803, subd. (g) (section 803(g)).) 1 These two companion cases address the circumstances under which such a refiling provision supplants final judgments, and thus invades the judicial power in violation of the separation of powers clause of the California Constitution (art. III, § 3). In analyzing that issue, we find persuasive for California purposes the federal separation of powers principles recently explained in Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc. (1995) 514 U.S. 211 [ 115 S.Ct. 1447 , 131 L.Ed.2d 328 ] (Plaut).

Consistent with Plaut , we held in Bunn, supra, 27 Cal.4th 1 , that separation of powers principles preclude retroactive application of refiling legislation in cases where the prior judgment of dismissal was entered or finally upheld before the legislation took effect. However, as explained in both Plaut, supra, 514 U.S. 211 , and Bunn, supra, 27…