People v. Pham CA3

Filed 10/3/25 P. v. Pham CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C102016

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 02F11038)

v.

LAMSON TRONG PHAM,

Defendant and Appellant.

In 2005, a jury found defendant Lamson Trong Pham guilty of one count of second degree murder and two counts of attempted murder. Defendant filed a petition in 2022 for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.6.2 After holding an evidentiary

1 Further undesignated section references are to the Penal Code. 2 Effective June 30, 2022, former section 1170.95 was recodified without substantive change to section 1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) Defendant filed his

1

hearing, the trial court found defendant guilty of second degree murder and both attempted murders beyond a reasonable doubt. On appeal, defendant contends the jury could have originally convicted him under now invalid theories. We affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant and several codefendants shot across a driveway during a party at individuals who appeared to be in an opposing gang. T.T. and V.D. were shot and injured, and Alan Khamphoumy was shot and killed. (People v. Pham (Jan. 22, 2008, C049751) [nonpub. opn.].) At trial in 2005, a criminalist for Sacramento County, who the parties stipulated was an expert in firearms and firearms identification, testified a bullet found during Khamphoumy’s autopsy came from a Kimber firearm. Defendant testified he used the Kimber the day of the shooting and had brought it to the party fully loaded with an extra magazine. Defendant also testified he now knows he was the one who shot the victim and answered “[y]eah” to the question: “[Y]ou killed Alan Khamph[o]umy with this gun, right?” V.D. also identified defendant as a person who may have fired first. The jury found defendant guilty of one count of second degree murder and two counts of attempted murder, along with several enhancements. The trial court sentenced defendant to 90 years to life, plus nine years four months. Defendant filed an appeal, and we affirmed the judgment with a sentence modification not at issue in this appeal. (People v. Pham, supra, C049751).) In 2019, defendant filed his first petition for resentencing under what is now section 1172.6; the trial court denied the petition at the prima facie stage, and we affirmed. (People v. Pham (Oct. 19, 2021, C092950) [nonpub. opn.].)