People v. Lopez CA2/8

Filed 5/1/25 P. v. Lopez CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B336552

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA050596-01) v.

DANIEL LOUIS LOPEZ, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Jacqueline Lewis, Judge. Affirmed.

Joanna Rehm, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

_______________________

Pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), we review this appeal of an order denying Daniel Louis Lopez’s petition for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.6. We affirm. BACKGROUND In 2002, a jury found Daniel Louis Lopez, Jr. guilty of the first degree murder of Sidney Hall, the robberies of Juanita Torres and Randy Santos, and possession of a firearm by a felon. The jury found true robbery-murder and lying-in-wait special- circumstance allegations. It also found true that Lopez personally discharged a firearm causing Hall’s death and that he personally used but did not discharge a firearm in the commission of the robberies. Before trial, Lopez had pleaded guilty to three additional counts of unlawful firearm possession. The trial court sentenced Lopez to a term of life without parole plus 41 years in state prison. We affirmed the convictions. (People v. Lopez et al. (May 30, 2003, B158058) [nonpub. opn.].) Twenty years later in 2022, Lopez filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6. The People conceded he had made a prima facie case of eligibility for relief and the trial court issued an order to show cause. On December 20, 2023, the trial court held an evidentiary hearing pursuant to section 1172.6, subdivision (d)(3). The People’s evidence included the reporter’s and clerk’s transcripts from the jury trial. Neither side offered new or additional evidence.