People v. Coleman CA2/5

California Court of Appeal May 13, 2025 No. B337534Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The trial court erred in summarily denying the defendant's section 1172.6 petition because the law regarding the applicability of Senate Bill 1437 to attempted murder was unsettled at the time of the defendant's 2021 plea, precluding a presumption of validity.

Issues

Whether a defendant who entered a plea to attempted murder after the effective date of Senate Bill 1437 is barred as a matter of law from seeking relief under Penal Code section 1172.6.
Whether the trial court erred in summarily denying the defendant's petition for resentencing.

Disposition. Reversed and remanded.

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Because the law regarding the application of Senate Bill 1437 was unsettled at the time defendant entered his plea in January 2021, we cannot presume that his conviction rested on a valid theory of liability.”

“The trial court erred in summarily denying defendant’s petition.”

Filed 5/13/25 P. v. Coleman CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B337534

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. TA150419) v.

MARKESS COLEMAN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Hector E. Gutierrez, Judge. Reversed and remanded.

Jonathan E. Demson, 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, Senior Assistant Attorney General, and Kristen J. Inberg and Melanie Dorian, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

****** Markess Coleman (defendant) appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for relief under Penal Code section 1172.6.1 The trial court found defendant ineligible for relief as a matter of law because he entered his plea to attempted murder in January 2021, which was after Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill 1437) became effective and narrowed the universe of conduct punishable as homicide. However, because the applicability of this new law to the crime of attempted murder was still unclear at the time of defendant’s plea, we cannot assume that his plea and prosecution complied with that new law. We accordingly reverse and remand for further proceedings. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Prosecution In October 2019, the People filed a felony complaint charging defendant with two counts of attempted premeditated murder committed on September 8, 2019 (§§ 187, 664); alleging that the crimes were committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(C)); and alleging that defendant personally discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury as well as that a principal did so (§ 12022.53). In the operative, second amended felony complaint, the People additionally charged a count of attempted premeditated murder committed on October 18, 2019 (§§ 187,

People v. Coleman CA2/5

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B337534

MARKESS COLEMAN,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief