People v. Stinson CA3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 23, 2022C093993BCalifornia1,268 words

Opinion

Opinion

BACKGROUND

“On January 1, 2018, Senate Bill No. 620 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill No. 620) went into effect. (Stats. 2017, ch. 682, §§ 1-2.) Senate Bill No. 620 amended sections 12022.5 and 12022.53, granting trial courts discretion pursuant to section 1385 to strike or dismiss certain firearm enhancements. (§§ 12022.5, subd. (c) (12022.5(c)); 12022.53, subd. (h) . . . .) “Relying primarily on legislative intent, on January 20, 2022, our Supreme Court held in Tirado that although the amendments at issue spoke only in terms of striking or dismissing a firearm enhancement, trial courts also have discretion under Senate Bill No. 620 to reduce section 12022.53 enhancements to uncharged lesser included enhancements. As relevant here, this interpretation left unresolved an apparent conflict with other unamended statutory provisions that required imposition of the harshest available punishment (see § 12022.53, subd. (f) . . .) [requiring the court to impose ‘the enhancement that provides the longest term of imprisonment’] and appeared to limit sentencing to enhancements contained within the same statute unless the other statute provided for harsher consequences (§ 12022.53, subd.…

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.