The Court of Appeal held that the trial court erred by refusing to consider appellant’s request to reduce the restitution fine (Pen. Code, § 1202.4, subd. (b)) because whether analyzed under principles of due process or the excessive fines clause of the Eighth Amendment, appellant was entitled to present evidence regarding his inability to pay the restitution fine. Upon remand, the court directed the court to also reconsider appellant’s sentence in light of Assembly Bill No. 1540 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.), which changed the procedural and substantive law governing recall and resentencing recommendations (Pen. Code, § 1170.03).
^