Error and/or relief
There are errors in the abstract of judgment that must be corrected, as it does not reflect the changes ordered on remand from the defendant’s earlier appeal.
First Holding:
The trial court’s minute order after remand is insufficient to comply with our directions to amend the abstract. Thus, remand again is warranted for the trial court to issue an amended abstract of judgment in keeping with our earlier order.
Authority:
PEN 1213(b) [If a copy of the minute order is used as the commitment document, the first page or pages shall be identical in form and content to that prescribed by the Judicial Council for an abstract of judgment.]
Second Holding:
(Gary note: The court cited no authority for its directive, but because the trial court was previously ordered to correct the abstract, and it did not, case authority is hardly called for. But there are many cases where the abstract contains errors discovered on the first appeal, and the appellate court has the authority to order correction. I have set out some cases on which courts could rely as authority to order correction of the abstract of judgment and the minute orders.)
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