People v. Rhodes CA3

DISCUSSION

We “cannot disregard” the Legislature’s subsequent expressions of its intent regarding a prior statute. (Western Security Bank v. Superior Court (1997) 15 Cal.4th 232, 244.) If an amendment “ ‘ “which in effect construes and clarifies a prior statute” ’ ” was

2 adopted soon after controversies arose about the proper interpretation of the statute, “ ‘ “it is logical to regard the amendment as a legislative interpretation of the original act -- a formal change -- rebutting the presumption of substantial change.” ’ ” (Id. at p. 243.) When a case involving such a clarifying amendment is on appeal, the appropriate resolution is to reverse and remand the matter for further proceedings in compliance with the amended legislation. (Id. at pp. 252-253.) Under former section 1170(d)(1), a trial court may, at any time upon the recommendation of the Secretary of the Department, “recall the sentence and commitment previously ordered and resentence the defendant in the same manner as if they had not previously been sentenced, provided the new sentence, if any, is no greater than the initial sentence.” This same language is contained in section 1170.03, which is where Assembly Bill…