People v. Johnson

*362 *940 Senate Bill No. 620 does not automatically trigger resentencing for a prisoner who was previously found to have used a firearm in the commission of a felony. The Legislature has expressly limited the reach of newly enacted Penal Code § 12022.53, subd. (h). 1 A defendant serving a sentence pursuant to a "final" judgment, who asks for such relief, should receive a "summary denial." (See People v. Romero (1994) 8 Cal.4th 728 , 737, 35 Cal.Rptr.2d 270 , 883 P.2d 388 .) The State of California has a "powerful interest in the finality of its judgments. ... [P]articularly strong in criminal cases, for '[w]ithout finality, the criminal law is deprived of much of its deterrent effect.' [Citations.]" ( In re Harris (1993) 5 Cal.4th 813 , 831, 21 Cal.Rptr.2d 373 , 855 P.2d 391 .) The state certainly has a strong interest in deterring the use of firearms in the commission of a felony.

Appellant contends that he is entitled to 1. be present in the trial court, 2. counsel, 3. de novo sentencing hearing, 4. present evidence, and 5. confront and cross-examine witnesses. These enumerated rights attach to an original sentence hearing. Unless and until the trial court issues an order in…