People v. Vasquez CA2/4

Filed 8/1/24 P. v. Vasquez CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B333572

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA078205) v.

RUDY EVAN VASQUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Karla D. Kerlin, Judge. Affirmed. Christine Aros, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

INTRODUCTION Appellant Rudy Evan Vasquez appeals from an order denying his petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6.1 His appellate counsel filed a brief under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), and appellant filed a supplemental brief. We review the contentions appellant raises in his supplemental brief and affirm the order. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND A. Prior proceedings The following facts and prior history are taken in part from our previous nonpublished opinion, People v. Vasquez (May 19, 2021, B308426) (Vasquez). “In May 1992, a reputed member of appellant Rudy Vasquez’s gang was killed by a rival gang member. Two weeks later, appellant drove into the rival gang’s territory. A fellow occupant of his car fired five or six gunshots into a group of rival gang members. Two of the rivals were hit, and one died.[ ]” “In 1994, a jury found appellant guilty of one count of second degree murder, with an enhancement for a principal’s use of a firearm, and one count of attempted first degree murder. The trial court sentenced appellant to 16 years to life plus a consecutive life sentence.” (Vasquez, supra.) In 2015, appellant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, asserting in part that the felony murder rule as applied to second degree murder was void for vagueness. The trial court denied the petition on the grounds that appellant “was not convicted of