People v. Thompson CA2/6

Filed 6/9/21 P. v. Thompson CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B308949 (Super. Ct. No. CR38992B) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v.

JASON LEMAR THOMPSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Jason Lemar Thompson appeals an order denying his Penal Code section 1170.95 petition for resentencing.1 The trial court determined that appellant had failed to make a prima facie showing for relief. In 1997 a jury convicted appellant of first degree murder. The jury found true an allegation that he had been armed with a firearm. He was sentenced to prison for 25 years to life for the murder plus one year for the firearm enhancement. He is still serving the sentence. We affirmed the judgment in an

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

unpublished opinion – People v. Thompson (Dec. 31, 1997, B111386). Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the order denying his petition for resentencing, and we appointed counsel to represent him. Having found no arguable issue, counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, setting forth the facts of the case and requesting that we review the entire record on appeal. Counsel noted that “[s]everal [appellate] courts have . . . recently held that Wende review is not required where the defendant appeals from the denial of a section 1170.95 resentencing petition. [Citations.]” But there is “no legal authority that prohibits us from [conducting an independent review of the record] in the interests of justice.” (People v. Flores (2020) 54 Cal.App.5th 266, 273.) Appellant personally filed a supplemental brief requesting that we reverse the denial of his petition and compel the trial court to issue an order to show cause and conduct an evidentiary hearing pursuant to section 1170.95, subdivisions (c) and (d). We affirm. Facts According to the statement of facts in our unpublished opinion, appellant was not the actual killer. The actual killer was Michael Thomas. Appellant and Thomas were members of a criminal street gang. Appellant drove Thomas in pursuit of a rival gang member. Thomas got out of the vehicle and shot the rival gang member four times. “Thomas ran back to the car. Appellant sped out of the neighborhood.” Criteria for Section 1170.95 Relief Section 1170.95, subdivision (a) provides: “A person convicted of felony murder or murder under a natural and