You asked the court to take a fresh look at an old prison sentence, and the judge agreed. Can that new, shorter sentence be taken away? A published California decision filed on October 26, 2026 says yes, if the judge acted without a change in the law that applies to your sentence.
The case is People v. Bray, decided by the Second District Court of Appeal, Division Two, on appeal from the Los Angeles County Superior Court. It explains a limit in Penal Code section 1172.1 that many families do not hear about until it is too late.
What Penal Code Section 1172.1 Lets a Judge Do
Section 1172.1 lets a court “recall” a felony sentence and sentence the person again, as if the first sentence had never been given. The new sentence can be lower, which makes it one of several California laws that can reopen a sentence after a case is over.
The statute gives a judge two different paths, and they work in very different ways.
- Upon a recommendation. The court may resentence a person “at any time upon the recommendation” of a correctional or prosecuting authority named in the statute. No change in the law is needed for this path.
- On the court’s own motion. A judge may act alone only in two situations: within 120 days of the date of commitment, or “at any time if the applicable sentencing laws at the time of original sentencing are subsequently changed by new statutory authority or case law.”
The power to act on the court’s own motion years later is fairly new. It came from Assembly Bill 600, which took effect in 2024.
You Cannot File a Petition Under 1172.1
This surprises many people, because section 1172.1, subdivision (c) says a defendant is not entitled to file a petition for relief under the statute. A person may still send the court a request, as happened in Bray. But the court does not have to respond to it, and it may decide to do nothing.
That means a request under section 1172.1 is an invitation, not a demand. Whether anything happens depends on the judge, and on whether the judge has the power to act at all.
What Happened in People v. Bray
Amber Bray was convicted in 1998 of first degree murder and conspiracy to commit murder. The jury found two special circumstances true, and she was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole. In 2024, through her lawyers, she asked the Los Angeles court to recall her sentence under section 1172.1.
The trial court held a hearing, and witnesses spoke about the support she would have if released. On its own motion, over the prosecutor’s objection, the court reduced the murder conviction to second degree murder and resentenced her to 15 years to life.
The District Attorney appealed, and the Court of Appeal reversed, directing the trial court to confirm that the original judgment and sentence remain in effect.
The Test the Court Used: Would the Sentence Be the Same Today?
More than 120 days had passed, so the judge could act alone only if “the applicable sentencing laws” had changed since 1998. The Court of Appeal said they had not. If Bray were convicted today of the same crime, with the same special circumstance findings, the law would still require death or life without parole. The same mandatory sentence applied in 1998, when she was first sentenced.
The court stressed one word: applicable. California has passed many laws that soften sentences since the 1990s. But the statute does not open the door because any sentencing law changed. The change has to apply to the person’s own sentence.
Five Arguments the Court Rejected
Bray’s lawyers pointed to several changes. The court found that none of them counted for her sentence.
- Section 1172.1 itself. The court said the statute cannot be its own change in the law. If it were, the change in law requirement would mean nothing.
- Youth offender parole under section 3051. That law gives many people who were 18 to 25 at the time of the crime an earlier parole hearing. But subdivision (h) excludes people sentenced to life without parole for a crime committed after age 18, so it did not apply to her.
- The new purpose of sentencing in section 1170. The statute now names public safety, rehabilitation, and restorative justice. The court said this did not change the sentence the law requires for her crime.
- Section 1016.7. This law tells prosecutors to consider factors such as youth during plea talks. The court said it is not a sentencing law, because it gives a judge no new choices.
- District Attorney charging policies. A policy about how a prosecutor will charge future cases is not a change in the law, the court said.
The court also held that there is no crime of conspiracy to commit second degree murder, so that part of the new sentence could not stand either.
What This Ruling Means if You Are Seeking Resentencing
The ruling does not end section 1172.1 relief, but it draws a clear line around one path. Here are practical points to take from it.
- Know which path you are on. A recommendation from an authority named in the statute does not need a change in the law. A judge acting alone years later does.
- Name the specific change. A request is stronger when it points to a new statute or court decision that would change the sentence if the person were sentenced today.
- Check the exclusions. A law that helps many people may still exclude certain sentences, as section 3051 does.
- Keep building the record. Rehabilitation, support letters, and a release plan still matter when a court has the power to act.
- Expect an appeal. Prosecutors may appeal an order after judgment that reduces a conviction or sentence, as they did here.
Families often help gather documents and letters for a hearing. Our earlier guides on tips for family members speaking at resentencing hearings and guidance for children speaking at a parent’s resentencing hearing may help. For a related limit on resentencing, see our post on partial habeas relief and full resentencing.
Common Questions About Section 1172.1
Can I file a petition for resentencing under section 1172.1?
No. Subdivision (c) says a defendant is not entitled to file a petition under this statute. You may ask, but the court does not have to respond.
Does any new sentencing law let a judge resentence me?
No. Under Bray, when the judge acts alone after 120 days, the change must be in a sentencing law that applies to your own sentence. A useful question is whether your sentence would be different if you were sentenced today.
Is section 1172.1 the same as a section 1172.6 petition?
No. Section 1172.6 is a separate law with its own petition process for certain murder, attempted murder, and manslaughter convictions. Our post on a recent 1172.6 ruling about conspiracy convictions explains one part of it.
When to Call Mines Law Firm
We handle auto accident injury claims, and are accepting clients for those. If you are injured in an auto accident, that is when you should call us at 888-700-0093.
ATTORNEY ADVERTISING. This article is for general information only and is not legal advice. Reading it does not create an attorney-client relationship. Every case depends on its own facts, and prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Responsible attorney: Jasmine Mines (State Bar No. 331135), Mines Law Firm, 468 N. Camden Drive, Suite 200, Beverly Hills, CA 90210.