100 Cal.App.5th 768
Cal. Ct. App.2024Background
- Steven Laurent Montgomery, Jr. pled no contest in 2018 to multiple violent felonies, including forcible oral copulation, injuring a domestic partner, false imprisonment, and assault with a deadly weapon, as part of a plea bargain resulting in an 18-year sentence, which included two 1-year prison priors.
- Senate Bill 483 (SB 483) later invalidated most prison prior enhancements imposed before January 1, 2020, making Montgomery eligible for resentencing and requiring the trial court to strike the enhancements.
- The trial court struck the prison priors from Montgomery’s sentence but did not hold a required resentencing hearing in Montgomery’s presence.
- Montgomery appealed, arguing for a full resentencing hearing as required by statute, and the Attorney General agreed this was necessary.
- The central dispute on appeal was whether the prosecutor may withdraw from the original plea bargain if Montgomery’s sentence is further reduced at resentencing due to SB 483 or related legislative changes.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Must resentencing under SB 483 include a full hearing? | Agrees a full resentencing hearing with counsel and presence is required. | Agrees, demands full hearing rights. | Yes; a full resentencing hearing is mandated. |
| Can prosecutor withdraw from plea agreement if sentence is reduced under SB 483? | Prosecutor must be allowed to amend or withdraw plea if sentence is further reduced. | Prosecutor cannot withdraw from the plea deal for any sentence reduction resulting from SB 483. | Prosecutor cannot rescind or amend the plea if the sentence is reduced under SB 483. |
| Do legislative changes beyond SB 483 allow withdrawal from plea? | Withdrawal should be allowed for reductions from laws beyond SB 483. | Withdrawal is not allowed for any sentence reduction via SB 483 resentencing. | Not allowed—Legislature intended to constrain prosecutor withdrawal for any reductions at SB 483 hearings. |
| Does SB 483’s legislative intent override traditional plea agreement enforcement? | SB 483 shouldn't override traditional plea agreement rules except for specific enhancements struck. | SB 483’s legislative intent precludes plea withdrawal for all reductions at resentencing. | Yes; SB 483’s uncodified section and statutory language control, barring withdrawal. |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Stamps, 9 Cal.5th 685 (constrains trial court power to unilaterally modify plea bargains, except where legislative intent provides otherwise)
- Doe v. Harris, 57 Cal.4th 64 (plea agreements are subject to changes in law unless the Legislature provides otherwise)
- Harris v. Superior Court, 1 Cal.5th 984 (retroactive relief applies where Legislature expressly includes plea convictions)