People v. Quintero CA5

California Court of Appeal Feb 24, 2025 No. F087983Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant was ineligible for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6 because his conviction did not rely on the felony-murder rule or the natural and probable consequences doctrine, which were the only theories affected by the legislative changes to sections 188 and 189.

Issues

Whether the defendant's voluntary manslaughter conviction is subject to relief under Penal Code section 1172.6.
Whether the jury instructions in the underlying trial relied on theories of liability eliminated by Senate Bill 1437.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“The changes made to sections 188 and 189 are immaterial to the underlying trial in this case.”

“The jury in this case was not instructed on felony murder or aiding and abetting under the natural and probable consequences doctrine.”

“All liability theories advanced at trial survived changes in the law and remain valid today.”

Filed 2/24/25 P. v. Quintero CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F087983 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. BF167482A) v.

JOEL REYMUNDO QUINTERO, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Kern County. John W. Lua, Judge. John F. Schuck, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Kimberley A. Donohue, Assistant Attorney General, Louis M. Vasquez, Amanda D. Cary, and Lewis A. Martinez, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

Joel Reymundo Quintero was convicted by jury of voluntary manslaughter and related crimes. We affirmed the convictions in a prior appeal. (People v. Quintero (Aug. 23, 2021, F078802) [nonpub. opn.].) Quintero now appeals after his Penal Code1 section 1172.6 petition for resentencing was denied. We affirm the denial. BACKGROUND The Kern County District Attorney charged Quintero with committing murder, several and various firearm crimes, and active gang participation. The charges included numerous enhancements for prior convictions, gang-related crimes, gang-related special circumstance murder, and personal firearm use. Relative to murder, the jury was instructed with the standard murder instruction, CALCRIM 520. The instruction explained guilt was proven if, among other points, Quintero acted with express or implied malice. The jury was also instructed on aiding and abetting. The aiding and abetting instruction applied if Quintero “intended” an accomplice to commit “the crime” and he “intended to” and “did in fact aid and abet” the crime. (CALCRIM 401.) Jurors were next informed of two theories reducing murder to manslaughter. First, “murder [was] reduced to voluntary manslaughter if” the “killing” occurred “because of a sudden quarrel or in the heat of passion[.]” (CALCRIM 570.) Second, “murder [was] reduced to voluntary manslaughter if” the “killing” occurred “in imperfect self-defense or imperfect defense of another.” (CALCRIM 571.) The jury acquitted Quintero of murder. The jury convicted Quintero of voluntary manslaughter, but did not specify under which theory it found guilt. It found true the

People v. Quintero CA5

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

MEEHAN, J.

AI Brief