People v. Rogers CA6

Filed 7/14/25 P. v. Rogers CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H051251 (Monterey County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. SS110099B)

v.

KEVIN ROGERS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Kevin Rogers was sentenced to 63 years in prison in 2014 after pleading no contest to various offenses including two counts of voluntary manslaughter. In 2023, he petitioned for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6. The trial court vacated one of his manslaughter convictions as well as a corresponding sentencing enhancement, and he was resentenced to 54 years in prison. On appeal, he argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel in the resentencing proceeding. As we will explain, we see no ineffectiveness on this record and will affirm the judgment. I. TRIAL COURT PROCEEDINGS In 2011, defendant was charged in case No. SS110022A with possessing a loaded firearm in a vehicle (Pen. Code, § 12031, subd. (a)(1); unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code); possessing a firearm as a convicted felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)); driving or taking of a vehicle without consent (Veh. Code, § 10851, subd. (a)); receiving or concealing stolen property (§ 496, subd. (a)); possessing a concealed firearm in a vehicle (§ 12025, subd. (a)(1)); active participation in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22,

subd. (a)); and resisting or obstructing a peace officer (§ 148, subd. (a)(1)). It was alleged that defendant committed the offenses for the benefit of a criminal street gang; had served a prior prison term; had been convicted of a prior serious or violent felony; and had been convicted of a prior strike. According to the record from the direct appeal, of which we have taken judicial notice at defendant’s request, the charges stemmed from an encounter in which defendant was in a car with his then-girlfriend, fled when approached by police, and left a loaded gun behind in the car. Both the car and the gun were identified as stolen. In 2013, defendant was charged in case No. SS110099B with murder (§ 187, subd. (a)); active participation in a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (a)); conspiracy to commit murder (§ 182, subd. (a)(1)); dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)); solicitation of murder (§ 653f, subd. (b)); and voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)). It was alleged that defendant had committed those offenses for the benefit of a criminal street gang; had been convicted of a prior serious felony; and had a prior strike conviction. The murder, gang participation, and manslaughter charges arose from a December 2010 incident in which defendant “stood by as backup” while a codefendant shot and killed the 18-year-old victim in retaliation for an earlier shooting. The conspiracy, witness dissuasion, and solicitation charges were based on a recorded jail call in which defendant made statements suggesting a plan to kill his then-girlfriend. Also in 2013, defendant was charged with murder (§ 187, subd. (a)) and voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)) in case No. SS130495A. It was alleged that defendant committed the offenses for the benefit of a criminal street gang; personally discharged a firearm at a vehicle causing death; and had a prior strike conviction. According to the record in that case, defendant and the victim were involved in a dispute regarding cocaine that defendant had sold to the victim. The victim was unhappy with the cocaine and wanted a refund, which defendant was unable to provide as a “middle man” in the transaction. Defendant was also upset that the victim had insulted defendant’s girlfriend. 2