People v. Emery CA3

DISCUSSION

Defendant asserts that the trial court erred in refusing to limit his probationary term to two years in compliance with a recent legislative enactment and contends that the proper remedy is for this court to reduce the term of his probation. The People do not dispute that defendant’s probation term should be reduced pursuant to the principle

At the time of the conditional plea, Penal Code section 1203.1 allowed trial courts to impose probation for a term of no more than five years. (Former Pen. Code, § 1203.1, subd. (a).)

2 established in In re Estrada (1965) 63 Cal.2d 740, which provides that ameliorative change in law applies retroactively. But relying heavily on People v. Stamps (2020) 9 Cal.5th 685, the People ask us to remand and allow them the opportunity to reconsider the plea agreement in light of the reduced probation term. We conclude Stamps does not apply and decline to remand the matter to the trial court. This issue was recently considered in People v. Stewart (2021) 62 Cal.App.5th 1065. We agree with Stewart that Stamps does not apply to cases where the Legislature directly made the terms of a plea bargain invalid and left the trial court with no…