People v. Pennell CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 23, 2022C094149California931 words

Opinion

Opinion

Renner, J.

I. BACKGROUND

In February 2010, defendant entered a guilty plea, stipulating to a sentence of 24 years eight months for kidnapping and two counts of second degree robbery—all

1 enhanced for personal use of a firearm under section 12022.53, subdivision (b)—and dissuading a witness by threat of force. In April 2021, the Secretary of the CDCR sent a letter to the trial court recommending recall and resentencing of defendant pursuant to the former version of Penal Code section 1170, subdivision (d)(1) (former section 1170(d)(1)),1 which authorized a court, at any time after receiving a recommendation from CDCR, to recall an inmate’s sentence and resentence that inmate to a lesser sentence. The recommendation was based on section 12022.53, subdivision (h), which had recently been amended by Senate Bill No. 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2017, ch. 682) to grant courts discretion to strike or dismiss firearms enhancements in the interest of justice. In May 2021, the court, without appointing counsel, providing notice, holding a hearing, or explaining its reasoning, declined to exercise its discretion to recall defendant’s sentence or strike the enhancements. While defendant’s…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.