People v. Verdugo CA2/4
Filed 11/24/25 P. v. Verdugo CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR
THE PEOPLE, B342616
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. LA013347) v.
ALEJANDRO VERDUGO,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Michael V. Jesic, Judge. Affirmed. Janyce Keiko Imata Blair, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, and Alejandro Verdugo, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 1994, a jury convicted Alejandro Verdugo of special circumstance murder and rape by foreign object in concert. Thereafter, Verdugo petitioned for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6.1 After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the petition. Verdugo appeals from the denial order. His appellate counsel filed a brief under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216. Verdugo filed a supplemental brief (1) challenging the denial of his section 1172.6 petition and (2) requesting a resentencing hearing under section 1172.1. We have exercised our discretion and independently reviewed the record for any arguable issues. Having found none, we affirm.
FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND 1. Evidence at Verdugo’s Trial The following facts are from this court’s nonpublished opinion in People v. Verdugo (Jan. 18, 1996, B088197) (Verdugo) and from the evidence deduced at trial as set forth in the prosecution and defense evidentiary briefs. At night in the parking lot of a bar, Suzanne Shapiro (the victim) was murdered by kicks to her head and a gunshot to her head. A trail of blood drops led about 40 feet to where the body, nude from the waist down, rested. The medical examiner’s office concluded that the gunshot was fatal and that the massive blunt force trauma to the head, with some injuries consistent with being kicked hard with a steel-toed work boot, would have been fatal independent of the gunshot. The victim’s anus was injured and penetrated with a foreign object, probably one or both of two baseball bats found at the scene, stained with fecal matter and blood. The victim’s teeth were chipped, and her jaw was bruised. Marks on her thighs appeared to be
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)