People v. Miller CA4/1

California Court of Appeal Jul 26, 2024 No. D082935Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court erred by engaging in impermissible factfinding at the prima facie stage of a Penal Code section 1172.6 petition by relying on police reports and surveillance video to determine the defendant's ineligibility for relief.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in summarily denying a section 1172.6 petition without issuing an order to show cause.
Whether the record of conviction conclusively established the defendant's ineligibility for relief as a matter of law.

Disposition. Reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“By relying on the police reports and surveillance video to deny Miller’s petition, the trial court engaged in impermissible factfinding when it determined his eligibility for relief at the prima facie stage.”

“the record of conviction does not conclusively establish Miller’s ineligibility for relief as a matter of law.”

Filed 7/26/24 P. v. Miller CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D082935

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (San Bernardino County Super. Ct. No. FSB18000241) LAVELLE MILLER,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, Ronald M. Christianson, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Jennifer A. Gambale, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Arlene A. Sevidal, James M. Toohey and Andrew Mestman, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Lavelle Miller appeals from the trial court’s denial of his Penal Code1

section 1170.952 resentencing petition regarding his attempted murder convictions. He contends the court improperly engaged in factfinding to determine his eligibility for relief. The Attorney General concedes the court erred in denying the petition at the prima facie stage without issuing an order to show cause. We resolve this case by memorandum opinion and reverse and remand with directions. (Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 8.1; People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847, 851-854.)

BACKGROUND

In 2017, Lavelle Miller and Cory Thomas, inmates at West Valley Detention Center were charged with two counts each of attempting to murder two deputies. A police report indicated one deputy was stabbed and the other deputy assaulted. Miller waived a preliminary hearing. In 2018, he pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted murder for the benefit of a criminal street gang, with the prosecutor striking the allegation the attempted murders were willful, deliberate, and premeditated. His plea included a stipulation the police reports formed the factual basis for his plea. The court sentenced Miller to a determinate term of 14 years and four months in prison. In 2022, he filed a petition for resentencing. He declared he was convicted under a theory of imputed malice based on his participation in the crime and requested counsel be appointed to represent him. At a hearing on the petition, counsel argued consideration of evidence in the police

People v. Miller CA4/1

AI Brief

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D082935

MEMORANDUM OPINION

BACKGROUND

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

DISCUSSION

DISPOSITION

KELETY, J.

RUBIN, J.

AI Brief