Background
In 2008 Albert Amaya was convicted of attempted extortion with a true gang finding and admitted two prior "strikes;" he was sentenced under the Three Strikes law to 25 years to life. The sentencing minute referenced a gang finding but did not impose a separate term for it and the abstract of judgment omitted the gang finding.
After Proposition 36 (Pen. Code § 1170.126) was enacted, Amaya petitioned for resentencing in 2013; because the gang finding made his offense "serious," he was ineligible under the statute. The petition and abstract did not disclose the gang finding.
At the June 2013 resentencing the prosecutor, defense counsel, and the clerk all (mistakenly) told the court the gang enhancement had been stricken; the court found Amaya eligible and resentenced him to a six-year determinate term and ordered his immediate release.
The People discovered the error about a month later, moved to recall/vacate the June 2013 order, and the trial court vacated the resentencing, reinstated the original 25-to-life sentence, and amended the abstract to show the gang finding.
Amaya appealed. The appellate court examined whether the June 2013 resentencing was authorized or void on its face and whether the gang finding required imposition of an additional term under different subdivisions of Penal Code § 186.22.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether June 2013 resentencing was unauthorized or void | People: June 2013 resentencing was void on its face because court lacked power to resentence under § 1170.126 given the gang finding | Amaya: Resentencing was judicial error (not clerical) and therefore final; cannot be vacated; collateral estoppel/res judicata bars rehearing | The June 2013 resentencing was void on the face of the record and the trial court properly vacated it and reinstated the original sentence |
| Whether clerical‑error doctrine allowed correction | People: N/A (relied on void-judgment doctrine) | Amaya: Error was judicial, not clerical, so not correctable as clerical mistake | Court: Error was judicial at sentencing, not clerical; clerical-correction doctrine did not apply |
| Whether an "unauthorized sentence" remedy applies | People: June 2013 sentence was not unauthorized because the record before the court suggested eligibility | Amaya: The reduced sentence is final and cannot be set aside as unauthorized | Court: June 2013 sentence was not merely unauthorized (it was procedurally supported by stipulations), but it was nonetheless void on its face so it could be set aside |
| Effect of gang finding — whether a separate term was required under § 186.22(b)(1) | People: Gang finding rendered offense a serious felony and did not require a separate additional years term where (b)(5) instead applied | Amaya: Trial court failed to impose a years‑term under (b)(1), so judgment void and remand for resentencing required | Court: Because the Three Strikes 25‑to‑life sentence made the underlying felony subject to (b)(5), no separate 2/3/4 year enhancement under (b)(1) was required; no remand necessary |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Karaman, 4 Cal.4th 335 (clarifies limits on resentencing after commitment)
- People v. Scott, 9 Cal.4th 331 (distinguishes unauthorized sentences from procedurally/factually flawed ones)
- In re Candelario, 3 Cal.3d 702 (distinguishing clerical from judicial sentencing error)
- People v. Mitchell, 26 Cal.4th 181 (clerical errors may be corrected at any time)
- People v. Estrada, 211 Cal.App.2d 722 (void probation order that a court lacked power to enter may be set aside)
- In re Alexander A., 192 Cal.App.4th 847 (sentence not "unauthorized" where court relied on parties' stipulated facts)
- People v. Williams, 227 Cal.App.4th 733 (holding Three Strikes 25‑to‑life makes felony punishable by life for § 186.22(b)(5) purposes)
- People v. Louie, 203 Cal.App.4th 388 (§ 186.22(b)(1) inapplicable when (b)(4) or (b)(5) applies)
- People v. Lopez, 34 Cal.4th 1002 (clarifies that a § 186.22(b)(5) minimum parole eligibility does not add years to a determinate sentence)