People v. Salas CA5
Opinion
Opinion
INTRODUCTION
This is the second appeal by defendant Joseph David Salas after a jury convicted him of assault with a deadly weapon and the court found true an allegation he suffered a prior serious felony conviction as defined in Penal Code section 667, subdivision (a)(1) that also qualified as a strike.1 In the previous appeal, we remanded the matter to the trial court to hold a new sentencing hearing during which the court could consider whether to exercise its newfound discretion to strike the section 667, subdivision (a)(1) enhancement in light of the passage of Senate Bill No. 1393 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill 1393). We also directed the trial court to correct a clerical error in the abstract of judgment. On remand, defendant appeared with new appointed counsel at the sentencing hearing. Defense counsel requested a continuance of the hearing so that she could familiarize herself with the case. The court denied the request but permitted counsel time to review the file. Then, the court stated it did not have authority to revisit defendant’s entire sentence but could only consider whether to strike the section 667, subdivision (a)(1) enhancement. The court declined to…