People v. Ramirez CA5

Filed 5/3/21 P. v. Ramirez CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE, F079983 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. M13251B) v.

ARTHUR ESPINDOLA RAMIREZ, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Madera County. Mitchell C. Rigby, Judge. Kyle Gee, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Thomas S. Patterson, Assistant Attorney General, Anthony R. Hakl and Nelson R. Richards, Deputy Attorneys General, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of Defendant and Appellant. Sally O. Moreno, Madera County District Attorney, and Cheryl L. Bonner, Deputy District Attorney, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Smith, Acting P.J., Snauffer, J. and DeSantos, J.

Defendant Arthur Espindola Ramirez was convicted of felony murder with a robbery special circumstance and sentenced to life without the possibility of parole.1 He filed a petition for resentencing, pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95,2 based upon the changes to the felony-murder rule and the natural and probable consequences doctrine of aider and abettor liability effectuated by Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill 1437). The trial court dismissed his petition, concluding that Senate Bill 1437 was unconstitutional. On appeal, defendant contends the trial court’s decision was error. The People disagree, but the Attorney General has filed an amicus brief in support of defendant’s position. We agree with defendant. Accordingly, we reverse the order and remand this matter for further proceedings pursuant to section 1170.95. PROCEDURAL SUMMARY Petitioner was charged with murder committed while he was an accomplice in the attempted commission of robbery (§§ 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(17); count 1), attempted robbery (§§ 211, 664; count 2), and conspiracy to commit robbery (§§ 182, subd. (a)(1), 211; count 3). On February 27, 1997, defendant was found guilty on all three counts and the special-circumstance allegation was found true. On November 7, 1997, defendant was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole on count 1, plus five years on count 3. The sentence on count 2 was stayed. On April 19, 2019, defendant filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.95. On August 5, 2019, the prosecutor filed a motion to dismiss defendant’s petition, arguing that section 1170.95 and other portions of Senate Bill 1437 are