California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from People v. Houle, 278 Cal.Rptr.3d 720, 64 Cal.App.5th 395 (Cal. App. 2021):
The People, in turn, contend the proper remedy is to remand the matter to the trial court to strike the two one-year enhancements and to exercise its sentencing discretion "to achieve a sentence as near as possible to the six-year stipulated term," citing People v. Navarro (2007) 40 Cal.4th 668, 681, 54 Cal.Rptr.3d 766, 151 P.3d 1177. The People reason that defendant "already received the benefit of the bargainnamely, avoiding trial, the reduction of the felony intimidation of a witness charge to a misdemeanor in another case, and the outright dismissal of a third case"and "nothing in amended section 667.5, subdivision (b) suggests it was intended to permit defendants to avoid stipulated sentences that could otherwise be reached by resentencing."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.