People v. Godlock CA4/3

Filed 12/12/24 P. v. Godlock CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G063107

v. (Super. Ct. No. 17WF0695)

JADON ROBERT GODLOCK, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Jonathan S. Fish, Judge. Affirmed. Michael C. Sampson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters and Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorneys General, Melissa Mandel, Seth M. Friedman, and Genevieve Herbert, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

In 2018, defendant Jadon Robert Godlock pleaded guilty to one 1 count of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664; count 1) , one count of possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 29800, subd. (a)(1); count 2), and one count of possession of ammunition by a prohibited person (§ 30305, subd. (a)(1); count 3). He admitted he committed count 1 “willfully and unlawfully and with the specific intent to kill” and that he personally inflicted great bodily injury on the victim. He also admitted a prior strike (§§ 667, subds. (d), (e)(1); 1170.12, subds. (b), (c)(1)) and a serious felony prior (§ 667, subd. (a) (1).) Consistent with the stipulated sentence, the court sentenced defendant to state prison for an aggregate term of 26 years. In 2023, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under section 1172.6. The court summarily denied defendant’s petition for resentencing, and defendant appealed. On appeal, defendant contends the court erred by denying his petition at the prima facie stage because his guilty plea did not establish ineligibility under section 1172.6. We disagree with defendant’s contentions and affirm the court’s order because the record of conviction establishes defendant is ineligible for relief as a matter of law. FACTS As the factual basis for his guilty plea in 2018, defendant stated: “In Orange County, California, on March 26, 2017 I willfully and unlawfully and with the specific intent to kill, attempted to murder Victor A., a human being. I also unlawfully possessed a firearm having been previously convicted