Error and/or relief
The trial court denied a petition by defendant for resentencing under what is now Penal Code section 1172.75 because, by the time the trial court conducted a resentencing hearing, the defendant had been released on parole. This was error, and the matter is remanded for resentencing.
First Holding:
Under section 1172.75, unless imposed for certain specified sexually violent offenses, any sentence enhancement that was imposed prior to January 1, 2020, pursuant to section 667.5(b) is invalid. Section 1172.75 also provides for resentencing of individuals upon whom now-invalid prison prior enhancements under section 667.5 were imposed. This resentencing proceeds in three stages.
The first stage, which involves correctional officials, is identification: Section 1172.75 requires state and county correctional officials to identify those persons in their custody currently serving a term for a judgment that includes [a now-invalid prison prior] enhancement and inform the sentencing court.
The second stage, which is conducted by the courts, is verification: The sentencing court must review the judgment and verify that the current judgment includes a sentencing enhancement that is now invalid.
The third stage, which is also conducted by the courts, is actual resentencing: If a defendant has been identified as eligible, and a court has verified eligibility, the court shall recall the sentence and resentence the defendant.
Authority:
PEN 1172.75
Second Holding:
Section 1172.75 does not require a defendant who is incarcerated and eligible at the beginning of the resentencing process under the statute to remain incarcerated until actual resentencing.
Authority:
People v. Washington (2026) 117 Cal.App.5th 1057
Third Holding:
Because section 1172.75 requires correctional officials to identify persons in custody serving a term, and a term is ordinarily understood to be time served in prison, only defendants who are incarcerated at the time of identification are eligible for resentencing under section 1172.75.
However, at the verification stage section 1172.75 requires courts to determine not that the identified persons are in custody serving a term, but rather that the current judgment includes a sentencing enhancement described in section 1172.75(a).
Moreover, because section 1172.75 expressly recognizes that there may be a substantial time lag between the identification and resentencing stages, it can be concluded that the Legislature intended the court-related criterion for resentencing eligibility to operate independently from earlier conditions applicable at the correctional official identification stage and did not include continued incarceration as a requirement at the verification stage.
Resentencing an individual who is on parole at the time of resentencing is not an idle act, because resentencing may reduce or terminate the period of parole.
Authority:
People v. Jefferson (1999) 21 Cal.4th 86, 95
People v. Washington (2026) 117 Cal.App.5th 1057, 1065-1067
Fourth Holding:
We also do not reach, and express no view on, whether a parolee serving an indeterminate sentence is entitled to termination, or reduction in the period, of parole if upon resentencing the sentence is reduced.
Authority:
In re Lira (2014) 58 Cal.4th 573, 578-582
In re Bush (2008) 161 Ca1.App.4th 133, 140-143