Error and/or relief
The abstract of judgment contained an error that must be corrected.
(Gary note: This error favored the defendant, in that it reflected that the conviction was of second degree murder instead of the actual first degree murder. I include it to emphasize the importance of checking abstracts of judgment and minute orders, because errors are common. Based on what I’ve seen, I conclude that most errors depict the defendant’s plight as worse than its reality. On occasion, the error would favor the defendant if left uncorrected.)
Holding:
The abstract of error must be corrected to reflect the crime of which the defendant was actually convicted.
(Gary note: the court cited no authority for this directive, but it unquestionably has the authority. I have set out here several cases the court could have cited.)
Authority:
People v. Mitchell (2001) 26 Cal.4th 181, 185
People v. Delgado (2008) 43 Cal.4th 1059, 1070
People v. Leon (2020) 8 Cal.5th 831, 855
In re Black (1967) 66 Cal.2d 881, 890
People v. Zackery (2007) 147 Cal.App.4th 380, 385
People v. Farell (2002) 28 Cal.4th 381, 384, fn. 2