People v. Jimenez CA2/8

Filed 2/6/25 P. v. Jimenez CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B330356

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA109517) v.

ANTHONY DANIEL JIMENEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from orders of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Jacqueline H. Lewis, Judge. Affirmed.

Kevin Smith, 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, Scott A. Taryle and Daniel C. Chang, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

**********

Defendant and appellant Anthony Daniel Jimenez appeals from the order denying, at the prima facie stage, his petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.6 (former § 1170.95). We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY In 2015, defendant, a member of the Azusa 13 gang, and another gang associate confronted two victims at gunpoint. (People v. Jimenez (June 22, 2020, B297604) [nonpub. opn.].) When the victims attempted to flee, shots were fired and one of the victims received a nonfatal facial wound. (Ibid.) A jury found defendant, who was tried alone, guilty of attempted murder (Pen. Code, §§ 187, 664) and found true the allegations the attempted murder was willful, deliberate and premeditated and that the offense was committed for the benefit of a gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)). (People v. Jimenez, supra, B297604.) The firearm use allegations were found not true (§12022.53, subds. (b), (c) & (d)). (People v. Jimenez, supra, B297604.) In a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found true prior conviction allegations, including that defendant had suffered a prior qualifying strike conviction within the meaning of the “Three Strikes” law. (People v. Jimenez, supra, B297604.) The court sentenced defendant to 36 years to life. (People v. Jimenez, supra, B297604.) In 2020, this court modified defendant’s judgment of conviction by striking the one-year prison prior in light of amendments to Penal Code section 667.5 and otherwise affirmed defendant’s conviction in its entirety. (People v. Jimenez, supra, B297604.) After defendant’s judgment became final, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 775 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) which made several amendments to Penal Code section 1172.6. Section 1172.6 had been