People v. Shinn CA1/3
Filed 12/17/20 P. v. Shinn CA1/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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
FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION THREE
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, A159952
v. (Mendocino County NOAH A. SHINN, Super. Ct. No. SCUKCRCR1015319)
Defendant and Appellant.
Defendant Noah A. Shinn appeals the summary denial of his Penal Code1 section 1170.952 petition to vacate his conviction for voluntary manslaughter and for resentencing on other counts. As we agree with the superior court that Shinn was not eligible for relief because he was not convicted of murder, we affirm. BACKGROUND Shinn’s conviction for voluntary manslaughter arose from an October 2010 home invasion robbery. During the home invasion, Shinn remained outside while his three accomplices entered the home. One
1 All further unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 Section 1170.95 was enacted as part of Senate Bill No. 1437 (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015).
1
accomplice was shot and killed, while the other two accomplices and Shinn fled the scene and were later arrested. Following a preliminary hearing, the Mendocino County District Attorney filed an information charging Shinn with several felony offenses including first-degree murder of his accomplice (§§ 187, 188, 189), together with a special circumstance allegation that the murder was committed during a robbery (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(G)). In June 2012, to avoid a potential sentence of life without the possibility of parole, Shinn entered into a negotiated plea agreement. 3 To effectuate the plea agreement, the prosecutor filed a first amended information charging Shinn with voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)), alleging he had willfully, unlawfully and without malice aforethought murdered the victim upon a sudden quarrel and heat of passion, together with related special allegations that Shinn (1) personally used a .22 caliber revolver within the meaning of section 12022.5, subdivision (a)(1), and (2) furnished a firearm “to another for the purpose of aiding, abetting, or enabling that person or any other person to commit a felony” pursuant to section 12022.4. The amended information also had counts charging Shinn with possession of a firearm by a felon (§ 12021, subd. (a)(1)) and possession of ammunition by a felon (§ 12316, subd. (b)(1)). During the change of plea proceedings, defense counsel recited the plea agreement, including that Shinn would plead guilty to all charges and admit to all special allegations in the first amended information and the court would sentence Shinn to a “stipulated” aggregate term. The agreement included the understanding that Shinn
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)