People v. Poplin CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJune 16, 2022C094541California348 words

Opinion

Opinion

Earl, J.

DISCUSSION

Generally, once judgment is rendered, the sentencing court is without jurisdiction to vacate or modify the sentence, except pursuant to section 1170.03, subdivision (a)(1). (People v. Torres (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 1081, 1084, 1085 (Torres) [referencing former § 1170, subd. (d)(1)]; People v. Karaman (1992) 4 Cal.4th 335, 344.) If a trial court does not have jurisdiction to rule on a motion to modify a sentence, an order denying the motion is not appealable, and the appeal must be dismissed. (Torres, supra, at pp. 1084- 1085; Fuimaono, supra, 32 Cal.App.5th at p. 135; People v. Turrin (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 1200, 1208 (Turrin), citing § 1237, subd. (b).) There are statutory exceptions to the general jurisdiction rule precluding resentencing (§§ 1170.126, 1170.18, 1170.95) and the courts may correct computational and clerical errors at any time. (Turrin, supra, at p. 1205.) In addition, a court may recall a sentence and resentence a defendant under certain circumstances within 120 days of a defendant’s custody commitment. (§ 1170.03.)3 The execution of defendant’s sentence began in 2010, some 11 years before he filed the motion that is the subject of this appeal. None of…

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.