People v. Trujillo CA6, H048255

Ruben Martinez Trujillo pleaded no contest to unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor (Pen. Code § 261.5(d)) and to misdemeanor solicitation of prostitution; other counts were dismissed under § 1385.
The plea was an "open sentence"; at sentencing (June 24, 2020) the court suspended imposition and granted felony probation for three years, imposed 240 days in county jail, and ordered lifetime registration as a sex offender under § 290.
At sentencing defense counsel asked the court to defer tier designation under the forthcoming SB 145 (sex‑offender tiering); the court agreed.
After sentencing, two statutory changes took effect: AB 1950 (reducing most felony probation maximums to two years, effective Jan. 1, 2021) and SB 145 (creating a tiered sex‑offender registration scheme).
On appeal Trujillo sought remand to reduce probation to two years under AB 1950, to permit reconsideration of sex‑offender registration under SB 145, and to strike a probation condition requiring alcohol testing.
The Court of Appeal remanded for resentencing to modify probation in accordance with AB 1950 and to allow the trial court to consider SB 145; it held the alcohol‑testing component invalid and directed that the word "alcohol" be omitted if testing is reimposed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (People)	Defendant's Argument (Trujillo)	Held
Whether AB 1950’s two‑year probation cap applies and what remedy is appropriate	Remand for resentencing so the trial court can modify probation under the new statute; suggested parties/trial court could be afforded opportunity to withdraw plea	Reduce probation term from three years to two years now on appeal	Remanded for resentencing to modify probation per AB 1950; court refused to allow DA or trial court to withdraw approval of the plea
Whether SB 145 requires reconsideration of lifetime registration	Conceded the trial court should be allowed to reconsider tiering under SB 145	Asked remand so trial court can exercise its new tiering discretion	Remanded so trial court can consider a lesser registration requirement under SB 145
Whether the probation condition authorizing alcohol and narcotics testing is reasonable under Lent	Testing is reasonably related to preventing future criminality and supervision goals	No nexus to offenses or history; alcohol testing is arbitrary and unreasonable	Alcohol‑testing portion invalid under Lent; if testing condition is reimposed court must omit the word "alcohol" (narcotics testing and field sobriety testing may remain)

Lent, 15 Cal.3d 481 (establishes three‑part test for invalidating probation conditions)
In re Ricardo P., 7 Cal.5th 1113 (clarifies proportionality and Lent’s third prong)
People v. Quinn, 59 Cal.App.5th 874 (addresses AB 1950’s retroactivity and remedies)
People v. Sims, 59 Cal.App.5th 943 (addresses application and remedy under AB 1950)
People v. Stewart, 62 Cal.App.5th 1065 (discusses remedial approaches after AB 1950)