Case: People v. Gonzalez - 4DCA holds that a remand for recalculation of presentencing credits does not entitle a defendant to a full resentencing hearing under Penal Code § 1170

Decided: 2/7/2025

Docket

Case Overview:

Procedural posture: Appeal from the superior court’s order recalculating presentencing credits and denying the defendant’s request for resentencing under Penal Code § 1170

Plaintiff-respondent: The People of the State of California

Defendant-appellant: Jesse Gonzalez, Jr.

Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One case no.: D082662

Appeal from: Imperial Superior Court (Plourd, J.)

Advocates: Laura Vavakin for Gonzalez; Steven Oetting for the People

Question:

(1) Does an appellate court’s remand for recalculation of presentencing credits constitute a new pronouncement of judgment and entitle a defendant to a full resentencing hearing under Penal Code § 1170?

Answer:

(1) No. The proper approach is to correct the credit count without vacating the convictions or associated sentences. “Because it is only after a sentence is vacated that the judgment becomes nonfinal and subject to the resentencing considerations, we further conclude a full resentencing is not appropriate under these circumstances.” (Citation omitted.)

Facts:

In 2012, a jury convicted Gonzalez of attempted deliberate premeditated murder and assault with a deadly weapon, with enhancements for inflicting great bodily injury. The superior court sentenced Gonzalez to an aggregate term of 17 years to life, with the possibility of parole, and gave Gonzalez credit for 700 days served.

A month later, the superior court recalled Gonzalez’s sentence under Penal Code § 1170(d). The superior court resentenced Gonzalez without specifying whether the sentence included the possibility of parole and without changing the credit calculation.

On Gonzalez’s direct appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal ordered corrections to the abstract of judgment to reflect that Gonzalez’s sentence was life in prison with the possibility of parole plus six years for the enhancements.

In 2022, Gonzalez filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming his sentence was not corrected and his credits were incorrectly calculated. The superior court summarily denied Gonzalez’s petition.

Gonzalez filed a habeas petition in the Fourth District Court of Appeal. The Fourth District Court of Appeal granted Gonzalez’s petition in part and remanded for recalculation of Gonzalez’s custody credits.

On remand, the superior court ordered the abstract of judgment amended to reflect credit for 759 days. Gonzalez appealed. Gonzalez’s appellate counsel notified the superior court of an error in the revised calculation. The superior court again amended the abstract, this time to reflect credit for 771 days.

Gonzalez’s appellate counsel filed a Wende brief. Gonzalez filed a supplemental brief. The Fourth District Court of Appeal ordered briefing on the question presented above.

Outcome:

The Fourth District Court of Appeal, Division One affirmed the superior court’s order denying Gonzalez’s request for a full resentencing.

Justice Huffman authored the opinion, joined by Justices Kelety and Castillo.

Links:

Westlaw: 2025 WL 428446