THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. TRAVIS SCOTT FREDERICKSON, Defendant and Respondent. (Cal. Ct. App., Dec. 5, 2025, No. G064577) 2025 WL 3496331, at *1–2
Summary: The Orange County District Attorney appealed after the trial court vacated first-degree murder convictions and imposed judgment on lesser offenses of second-degree murder. (Pen. Code, § 1172.1.) The district attorney argues that vacating the convictions, on which the jury found true a special circumstance, violated a statute prohibiting judges from “strik[ing] or dismiss[ing] any special circumstance.” (§ 1385.1.) The Court of Appeal harmonized the statutes and held that vacating the underlying convictions did not “strike or dismiss” the special circumstance.
Facts of resentencing in trial court
A jury convicted Frederickson in 1998 of two counts of first degree murder and found he personally used a firearm. (§ 187; former § 12022.5, subd. (a).) The jury also found true a special circumstance of multiple murder. (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(3).) The trial court sentenced Frederickson to life without the possibility of parole. (§ 190.2, subd. (a).)
Frederickson invited the trial court in 2024 to recall his sentence and resentence him based on a change in the law allowing courts to strike firearm enhancements.
The court resentenced, explaining: “And from what I can tell in reading these cases, 1172.1 permits the court to reduce a first degree murder to a second degree murder …. That’s just what the law is.” The court added: “These are the hardest cases this court has. Because the gravity of the offense and the offenses is so severe. But this court continues to believe that a man can turn himself around. And just try to better himself and better those around him. Which is apparently what [Frederickson] is trying to do is to improve a lot of the people around him also. And the court believes that he can continue to do good works and help those around him.”
Penal code section 1385.1 and bar on striking or dismissing a special circumstance
The court acknowledged section 1385.1: “And so the court believes that, clearly, this court cannot strike or dismiss a special circumstance. Nor can I use 654 to stay punishment.”
“What the court is doing is reducing the first degree murder, murders, to second degree murders. And since that special attaches only to the first degree murders, once those murders are reduced the special circumstances also are no longer — are no longer in play.”
The court vacated its prior judgment and entered a new judgment of conviction for two counts of second degree murder with firearm enhancements. The court sentenced Frederickson to serve two concurrent terms of 25 years—comprised of 15-year indeterminate sentences plus 10 years for the enhancements.
This case required harmonizing two statutes. “ ‘ “[A] court must, where reasonably possible, harmonize statutes, reconcile seeming inconsistences in them, and construe them to give force and effect to all of their provisions.” ’ ” (Even Zohar Construction & Remodeling, Inc. v. Bellaire Townhouses, LLC et al. (2015) 61 Cal.4th 830, 838 (Even Zohar).)
Section 1172.1 provides: a “court may, on its own motion, … at any time if the applicable sentencing laws at the time of original sentencing are subsequently changed by new statutory authority …, recall the sentence and commitment previously ordered and resentence the defendant in the same manner as if they had not previously been sentenced.” (§ 1172.1, subd. (a)(1).) It further provides that “[t]he resentencing court may, in the interest of justice [¶] … [¶] [v]acate the defendant’s conviction and impose judgment on any necessarily included lesser offense or lesser related offense … and then resentence the defendant to a reduced term of imprisonment.” (§ 1172.1, subd. (a)(3)(B).)
Section 1385.1 provides: “Notwithstanding … any other provision of law, a judge shall not strike or dismiss any special circumstance which is … found by a jury … as provided in Sections 190.1 to 190.5.” (§ 1385.1.) It is an initiative statute enacted in 1990 by “voters through Proposition 115, also known as the Crime Victims Justice Reform Act.” (People v. Garcia (2022) 83 Cal.App.5th 240, 257 (Garcia).)
The statutes are best harmonized by understanding section 1385.1 to limit the power of “a judge” to divorce a special circumstance from its underlying conviction—a judge cannot “strike or dismiss” a special circumstance. Nor can a judge, as the trial court recognized, stay punishment on the special circumstance. (Garcia, supra, 83 Cal.App.5th at pp. 256–258.)
But section 1385.1 does not purport to address what can happen to the underlying conviction. But convictions can be vacated by a variety of well-established procedures—e.g., a motion to vacate (§ 1473.7 et seq.); a new trial motion (§ 1181); a reversal on appeal (People v. Massie (1985) 40 Cal.3d 620, 625); ameliorative legislation (§ 1172.6); and petitions for writs of habeas corpus (§ 1473 et seq.).
If the underlying conviction falls through one of these permissible procedures, then the special circumstance falls by operation of law, not by any action of the “judge.” (§ 1385.1.) As the trial court correctly found, the special circumstance is not “in play.” There simply is no longer any underlying conviction to which the special circumstance may attach.
Nor do we amend section 1385.1. We simply carry out our duty to “ ‘“harmonize statutes, reconcile seeming inconsistences in them, and construe them to give force and effect to all of their provisions.” ’ ” (Even Zohar, supra, 61 Cal.4th at p. 838.) Section 1385.1 addresses only a judge’s efforts to divorce a special circumstance from a standing conviction. It simply does not restrict any of the permissible ways for vacating the underlying conviction.
DISPOSITION
The judgment is affirmed.
The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes only. Information on this website may not constitute the most up-to-date legal or other information.