People v. Sandoval CA2/2

California Court of Appeal Sep 26, 2024 No. B331508Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that a defendant convicted of murder is ineligible for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6 as a matter of law when the record establishes they were the sole defendant and the jury found they personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing death.

Issues

Whether the trial court improperly relied on a prior appellate opinion's factual summary to deny a section 1172.6 petition.
Whether a jury's true finding on a personal firearm use enhancement precludes section 1172.6 relief when the defendant was the sole person charged.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Because defendant is ineligible for section 1172.6 relief as a matter of law, we affirm.”

“the court is free to consider the “procedural history of the case recited in any prior appellate opinion” at any stage of section 1172.6 proceedings.”

“the jury finds that defendant was the only person charged who personally used a firearm to commit murder, that finding does establish that defendant was the actual killer.”

Filed 9/26/24 P. v. Sandoval CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B331508

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA126752) v.

MANUEL FIGUEROA SANDOVAL,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Laura R. Walton, Judge. Affirmed.

Matthew Alger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Noah P. Hill and Steven E. Mercer, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ______________________________

Defendant and appellant Manuel Figueroa Sandoval appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.61 (former § 1170.95).2 Because defendant is ineligible for section 1172.6 relief as a matter of law, we affirm. BACKGROUND In 2013, an information was filed charging defendant with second degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)); unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1)); and unlawful firearm activity (former § 29805). It also alleged that defendant personally used and intentionally discharged a firearm, causing great bodily injury and death. (§ 12022.53, subds. (b), (c) & (d).) Later that year, a jury convicted defendant of all three offenses, and found the firearm allegations true. The trial court sentenced defendant to a total of 40 years to life (15 years to life on the murder charge and a consecutive term of 25 years to life for the firearm enhancement).3 On direct appeal, we affirmed the judgment. (People v. Sandoval (May 12, 2015, B254512) [nonpub. opn.] (Sandoval).) Nine years later, defendant filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6. The prosecution opposed the petition,

People v. Sandoval CA2/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, B331508

MANUEL FIGUEROA SANDOVAL,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief