People v. Tirado CA5

INTRODUCTION

In People v. Tirado (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 637 (Tirado I), we concluded the trial court did not have discretion under Penal Code1 sections 1385 and 12022.53, subdivision (h) (§ 12022.53(h)) to substitute a section 12022.53, subdivision (d) (§ 12022.53(d)) enhancement for a different enhancement. (Tirado I, at p. 640.) In People v. Tirado (2022) 12 Cal.5th 688, the Supreme Court reversed our judgment, holding that “the statutory framework permits a court to strike the section 12022.53(d) enhancement found true by the jury and to impose a lesser uncharged statutory enhancement instead.” (Id. at p. 692.) The Supreme Court remanded the matter to this court “to address the People’s unresolved forfeiture argument . . . and for any further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.” (Id. at p. 702.) Following remand, we granted defendant Jose Guadalupe Tirado’s request to file supplemental briefing. Defendant contends the matter should be remanded to the trial court for resentencing consistent with Assembly Bill No. 124 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Assembly Bill No. 124). The People concede defendant is entitled to remand and resentencing and, because of that, their…