Does a sentence that was improperly increased on remand violate the rule against double jeopardy?

None of the cases cited by defendant involved an original sentence that was unauthorized. For example, in People v. Mustafaa (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 1305, the trial court was prohibited from imposing a greater sentence on remand because it "imposed a legal aggregate sentence, only fashioning it in an unauthorized manner. The court's error in separating the convictions from their attendant enhancements, though unauthorized by law, does not make the total sentence illegal." (Id. at pp. 1311-1312.) In People v. Torres (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1420, the court held the rule against double jeopardy applied because the original sentence could have been lawfully imposed; "it did not fall below the mandatory minimum sentence and was therefore not a legally unauthorized lenient sentence." (Id. at p. 1432.) As discussed, the original sentence in this case fell

Page 4