Reported / Citable
Background
Juan Carlos Cruz obtained resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6 after changes to California’s attempted-murder law. His attempted-murder conviction, which had rested on a natural-and-probable-consequences theory, was vacated and redesignated as assault with a firearm under subdivision (e). The original case also included a firearm allegation tied to the now-vacated attempted-murder count.
At resentencing, the trial court attached a firearm enhancement to the newly redesignated assault offense. Cruz argued that the enhancement could not simply migrate from the vacated conviction to an offense that had never been charged or actually litigated. The Attorney General relied on an earlier appellate decision allowing a previously found arming allegation to be imposed with a redesignated target offense.
The Court’s Holding
The Sixth District reversed. Applying the California Supreme Court’s reasoning in People v. Arellano, the court held that section 1172.6 requires allegations and enhancements attached to the vacated conviction to be vacated as well. Resentencing proceeds on remaining charges; it does not allow a court to reconstruct a new enhanced offense from allegations associated with the eliminated count.
The fact that Cruz previously admitted the firearm allegation did not authorize attaching it to the redesignated assault. The admission concerned the vacated attempted-murder conviction, while the target offense was neither charged nor litigated as a separate count. The court found the contrary reasoning of People v. Howard difficult to reconcile with Arellano and remanded for a new resentencing hearing without the challenged enhancement.
Key Takeaways
- Section 1172.6 resentencing vacates enhancements attached to the murder or attempted-murder conviction that has been set aside.
- A court may not transfer such an enhancement to a newly redesignated target offense merely because the allegation was once charged or admitted.
- Resentencing is limited to charges that remain; it is not an opportunity to add punishment based on what the evidence might have supported.
- Defense counsel should trace every enhancement to its original count and object when it is reattached to a redesignated offense.
Why It Matters
The ruling narrows the punishment available when a successful section 1172.6 petitioner’s conviction is redesignated as an uncharged target offense. It also signals that older cases permitting enhancements to be carried over may no longer be reliable after Arellano. Prosecutors and defense lawyers should review the charging document, verdicts, admissions, and original count-specific attachments before proposing a new sentence.