People v. Ruiz CA2/5

Filed 6/22/21 P. v. Ruiz CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B305229

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA190220) v.

RICARDO RUIZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, George Lomeli, Judge. Reversed and remanded. Danalynn Pritz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Senior Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina, Supervising Deputy Attorney General, and Alan L. Amann, Deputy Attorney General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant and appellant Ricardo Ruiz (defendant) appeals from an order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95.1 The Attorney General concedes a remand for further section 1170.95 proceedings in the trial court is required because the trial court should have appointed counsel for defendant before ruling on his petition. We will reverse and remand for that reason.

I. BACKGROUND Defendant participated with four others in the fatal jailhouse beating of victim Mauricio Avalos (Avalos). (People v. Sandoval et al. (Sept. 19, 2005, B176199 [nonpub. opn.] (Sandoval).) The cause of death was blunt force trauma caused by contact with a hard surface or object. (Ibid.) At defendant’s trial on a charge of murder, the jury was instructed on the natural and probable consequences doctrine, specifically, that they could find defendant guilty of murder if it were the natural and probable consequence of an assault. (Sandoval, supra, B176199.) The Attorney General acknowledges the prosecutor, at least in part, relied on the natural and probable consequences theory in closing argument. The jury found defendant guilty of second degree murder and the trial court sentenced him to 15 years to life in prison. (Ibid.) This court affirmed the judgment (with minor corrections to the abstract thereof) on direct appeal. (Ibid.) In November 2019, defendant filed a section 1170.95 petition asking the trial court to vacate his murder conviction