People v. Jimenez CA6

Filed 9/25/24 P. v. Jimenez CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H051809 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. 18CR004825)

v.

MIGUEL JIMENEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT1 Defendant Miguel Jimenez appeals an order denying a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6.2 On appeal, counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) and Jimenez filed a supplemental letter. Having reviewed Jimenez’s letter, we conclude that Jimenez has failed to raise an arguable issue on appeal and affirm the order. I. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND3 In August 2019, Jimenez pleaded no contest to second degree attempted murder (§§ 187, subd. (a), 664), street terrorism (§ 186.22, subd. (a)), and assault with a deadly

Before Greenwood, P. J., Grover, J. and Danner, J. 1

Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 3 The underlying facts are not relevant to this appeal but were stated in this court’s opinion in Jimenez’s prior appeal. (People v. Jimenez (July 27, 2023, H050000) [nonpub. opn.].)

weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)). He also admitted allegations of firearm use (§ 12022.5, subd. (a)), and a prior strike. In the plea waiver form, Jimenez agreed that the preliminary hearing transcript provided a factual basis for the conviction. At the change of plea hearing, Jimenez’s counsel stipulated to a factual basis as set forth in the plea waiver. The trial court imposed an aggregate sentence of 20 years and four months. In January 2022, Jimenez petitioned for resentencing under former section 1170.95. After the trial court found that Jimenez had failed to make a prima facie showing and denied the petition, Jimenez appealed. In an unpublished opinion (People v. Jimenez, supra, H050000), this court reversed and remanded the matter with instructions to issue an order to show cause and to conduct further proceedings in accordance with Penal Code section 1172.6. 4 Upon remand, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing where the court heard testimony from multiple witnesses and received other evidence including video surveillance of the crime. On January 30, 2024, the trial court found that Jimenez was the direct perpetrator of the shooting and that he harbored the express malice of the intent to kill. Based on these findings, the trial court denied Jimenez’s petition. Thereafter, Jimenez filed a timely notice of appeal. On appeal, counsel filed an opening brief pursuant to Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at pages 231-232. We notified Jimenez that he could file a supplemental brief on his own behalf, and that failure to do so would result in dismissal of the appeal as abandoned. (Id. at p. 232.) Jimenez filed a timely supplemental letter.