People v. Alcala CA4/3

Filed 9/18/20 P. v. Alcala CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G057701

v. (Super. Ct. No. 09CF1971)

ARTURO ALCALA, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Kimberly Menninger, Judge. Affirmed. Erica Gambale, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Idan Ivri, and J. Michael Lehmann, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, Arturo Alcala was convicted of voluntary 1 manslaughter. (Pen. Code, § 192, subd. (a).) Alcala appeals from the trial court’s order denying his petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. Because section 1170.95 applies only to murder convictions, the court properly denied Alcala’s petition. Additionally, Alcala’s exclusion from section 1170.95 did not violate his right to equal protection. We affirm the court’s order. FACTS In 2009, a complaint charged Alcala with murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), and street terrorism (§ 186.22, subd. (a)). Pursuant to a plea agreement, an amended complaint charged Alcala with voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a); count 1), and street terrorism (§ 186.22, subd. (a); count 2). As to count 1, it alleged that Alcala committed the crime for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)), and he carried a firearm with a detachable magazine and belt feeding device (§ 12021.5, subd. (b)). Alcala pleaded guilty to counts 1 and 2 and admitted the special allegations. The trial court sentenced Alcala to 20 years in prison. In 2019, Alcala filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.95. The trial court determined Alcala failed to establish a prima facie case because he was not convicted of murder and denied the petition. DISCUSSION Alcala asserts section 1170.95 applies to those whose manslaughter convictions resulted from a plea to manslaughter in lieu of murder. He claims his petition set forth a prima facie case and as a result, he was entitled to a resentencing hearing. He also contends the trial court violated his equal protection rights by denying the petition. We disagree, and affirm the court’s order denying his petition.