How People v. Valencia Could Help Accused Individuals Facing Serious Charges
At Wallin & Klarich, we often remind clients that even after a conviction, the law still provides important protections during sentencing. Courts must follow strict rules when calculating prison terms, especially in cases involving multiple charges and enhancements. A recent appellate decision, People v. Valencia, shows how sentencing errors can lead to a new sentencing hearing—and potentially a reduced overall sentence.
For accused individuals facing serious felony charges, understanding how sentencing laws work can make a significant difference.
Our experienced criminal defense attorneys at Wallin & Klarich can guide you through the legal process. Call Wallin & Klarich today toll-free at (877) 466-5245 for your free consultation with one of our criminal defense attorneys near you.
The Case Background
In People v. Valencia, officers attempted to stop Isaias Valencia for suspected drunk driving. The situation escalated when Valencia went to his apartment and fired a revolver through a bedroom door, killing one officer and seriously injuring another. After an overnight standoff, a SWAT team subdued him.
A jury later convicted Valencia of multiple offenses, including murder, assault with a firearm on peace officers, and firearm possession.
While the convictions remained in place, the appellate court closely examined how the trial court calculated the sentence—and found important errors.
The Key Sentencing Rule That Matters to Accused Individuals
In California, when someone is convicted of multiple offenses and the court imposes consecutive sentences, Penal Code section 1170.1 controls how those terms must be calculated. The law requires the court to choose one offense as the principal term and impose the full sentence for that count, then treat the remaining determinate offenses as subordinate terms. Those subordinate terms must be reduced to one-third of the statutory middle term.
This rule prevents courts from simply stacking full sentences on every count when multiple determinate offenses are involved.
For accused individuals, this rule can have a major impact on the total length of a prison sentence.
What Went Wrong in the Valencia Case
At sentencing, the trial court imposed six years plus 25 years to life for each of three assault counts involving peace officers. However, instead of reducing the determinate portions of the subordinate offenses to one-third of the middle term as required by law, the court imposed full consecutive determinate terms.
The court believed the rule did not apply because the assault charges included firearm enhancements that carried indeterminate terms such as 25 years to life.
The appellate court disagreed.
The court explained that the key issue is whether the underlying offense carries a determinate sentence, not whether an enhancement has an indeterminate term. Because the assault counts and other related offenses were determinate crimes, the sentencing rules under section 1170.1 still applied.
As a result, the trial court should have designated one principal term and reduced the remaining determinate offenses to subordinate terms calculated at one-third of the middle term.
Why This Decision Matters for Accused Individuals
The court ultimately affirmed the convictions but sent the case back for resentencing because the trial court misapplied the law. This outcome highlights an important reality: sentencing errors happen, even in serious cases.
For accused individuals facing multiple felony charges, especially cases involving firearm enhancements, People v. Valencia reinforces several important points.
Courts must follow specific sentencing formulas, and if they do not, the sentence may be challenged on appeal. Enhancements that carry very long sentences do not automatically eliminate the protections built into California’s determinate sentencing rules. Careful review of sentencing calculations can reveal errors that significantly affect the total time a person may face.
In cases involving multiple charges such as assault, evasion, firearm possession, or other determinate offenses, the difference between a full consecutive term and a subordinate term calculated at one-third of the middle term can add up to many additional years.
How This Case Could Help in Similar Situations
If an accused individual is facing several felony counts in one case, a defense attorney must analyze how those counts may be sentenced if the court chooses consecutive terms. The principles confirmed in People v. Valencia may apply when multiple determinate offenses are charged in the same case, firearm or other enhancements are alleged, the court considers imposing consecutive sentences, or there is a question about whether the subordinate terms were calculated correctly.
In these situations, a sentencing error could result in a successful appeal or a resentencing hearing.
The Importance of Experienced Legal Representation
Complex sentencing issues are often overlooked until after trial, but they should be addressed from the very beginning of a case. An experienced defense attorney will evaluate not only the charges and evidence, but also the potential sentencing exposure and how California law limits what a court can impose.
At Wallin & Klarich, our attorneys carefully review every stage of a case—from investigation and trial through sentencing and appeal—to ensure that accused individuals receive the full protection of the law. Cases like People v. Valencia demonstrate that even when a case involves serious allegations, sentencing must still follow the rules set by California law.
Call Wallin & Klarich Today
If you or a loved one is facing multiple felony charges, understanding how sentencing laws apply could make a significant difference in the outcome of the case. Speaking with an experienced Wallin & Klarich criminal defense attorney can help protect your rights and ensure that any sentence imposed is calculated correctly.
At Wallin & Klarich, we have offices all over Southern California: Irvine, Pasadena, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Torrance, and Anaheim. Additionally, our law firm can handle many types of cases statewide.
Discover how our team can assist you. Contact us today, toll-free at (877) 466-5245 for a free consultation with a skilled criminal defense attorney near you.
Email Us