People v. Fouse, 98 Cal.App.5th 1131

Darlene Renee Fouse was convicted in 2006 of multiple counts, including two attempted murders of peace officers, three robberies, assault, and conspiracy.
Fouse was primarily the getaway driver during a series of violent home invasion robberies.
She sought resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6, based on changes limiting the felony-murder and natural and probable consequences doctrines.
The trial court ruled Fouse could no longer be convicted of attempted murder under the amended law, vacated those convictions, but then redesignated the attempted murder counts as assault on an officer with a firearm and added a felony evading conviction.
Fouse appealed, arguing the court exceeded its authority by redesignating or adding convictions not charged as the target offense; the People argued the trial court acted within its discretion and consistent with her conduct.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether trial court could redesignate vacated attempted murder convictions as new offenses (assault with firearm on a peace officer, felony evasion) under section 1172.6 when target offenses were charged and convicted	Trial court can redesignate to underlying or related offenses to match actual criminal culpability	When target offense (robbery) was charged and convicted, statute requires resentencing only on remaining charges; redesignation not allowed	Court agreed with Defendant: statute only permits resentencing on remaining charges, not redesignation or adding new convictions when target offense was charged

People v. Howard, 50 Cal.App.5th 727 (Cal. Ct. App. 2020) (clarified trial court's flexibility in redesignation only applies when underlying felony was not charged)
People v. Silva, 72 Cal.App.5th 505 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021) (addressed court discretion and due process in resentencing when target offenses were uncharged)
People v. Watson, 64 Cal.App.5th 474 (Cal. Ct. App. 2021) (court can redesignate multiple underlying felonies if neither were charged)