People v. Martin CA2/6

DISCUSSION

Martin contends the trial court should have recalled his sentence because it included a now-invalid enhancement for his prior prison term. We agree. Section 1172.75 requires CDCR to inform trial courts of inmates serving sentences with one or more now-invalid prior prison term enhancements. (§ 1172.75, subd. (b).) Once a court receives this information and confirms that the inmate’s sentence includes an invalid enhancement, it “shall recall [their] sentence and resentence” them. (Id., subd. (c), italics added.) During resentencing, “[t]he court shall apply . . . any . . . changes in law that reduce sentences or provide for judicial discretion” (id., subd. (d)(2))—i.e., the court shall conduct a full resentencing (Christianson, supra, 97 Cal.App.5th at pp. 314-317, review granted). Such resentencing “shall result in a lesser sentence than the one originally imposed as a result of the elimination of the repealed enhancement, unless the court finds by clear and convincing evidence that imposing a lesser sentence would endanger public safety.” (§ 1172.75, subd. (d)(1).) Here, CDCR informed the trial court that Martin’s sentence included a now-invalid prison prior. The…