People v. Randle CA3

DISCUSSION

On appeal, the parties agree Senate Bill No. 567 applies retroactively to this case. Defendant argues his case should be remanded for a new sentencing hearing pursuant to the amended section 1170 because the trial court did not find true beyond a reasonable doubt the facts underlying the circumstances justifying the upper term, nor were those facts stipulated. The Attorney General counters that remand is unnecessary and any error was harmless. We agree Senate Bill No. 567 applies retroactively, and find any error in failing to make the required findings harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, as we next explain. At the time defendant was sentenced, former section 1170 provided that when a judgment of imprisonment is to be imposed and a statute specifies three possible terms, “the choice of the appropriate term shall rest within the sound discretion of the court.”

3 (Former § 1170, subd. (b).) To inform the sentencing court’s decision, the California Rules of Court list various circumstances in aggravation and mitigation. Senate Bill No. 567 amended section 1170, effective January 1, 2022. Under the newly amended version of section 1170, when a judgment of imprisonment is…