People v. Dietzman CA5

Filed 7/20/21 P. v. Dietzman 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, F080382 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR-19-002421) v.

JONIE DIETZMAN, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Stanislaus County. Nancy A. Leo, Judge.

Kendall Dawson Wasley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Catherine Chatman and Harry Joseph Colombo, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

*Before Detjen, Acting P.J., Peña, J. and Snauffer, J.

INTRODUCTION Defendant Jonie Dietzman pleaded no contest to first degree felony murder in 1994. After the passage of Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill 1437), defendant filed a Penal Code section 1170.95 petition for resentencing. (Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.) The court denied the petition, noting it did not believe defendant had established a prima face case there was a reasonable likelihood she would be entitled to relief; rather, “she clearly acted as a principal and aided and abetted.” Defendant now challenges the denial of her petition and the People concede remand is necessary for the court to issue a show cause order and to hold an evidentiary hearing because the record of conviction did not establish defendant was categorically ineligible for relief. We agree with the parties, reverse the court’s order denying the petition, and remand the matter for further proceedings. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant was charged, in part, with willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously committing and attempting to commit a robbery and burglary, during the commission of which a human being was killed (count I). Her case proceeded to a jury trial in 1994 and, while the jury was deliberating on the charges filed against her, defendant pleaded no contest to count I, first degree felony murder committed during a robbery and burglary. She also pleaded no contest to an enhancement allegation that she was armed with a firearm during the commission of the crime within the meaning of section 12022, subdivision (a). The court sentenced defendant to a term of 25 years to life plus one year for the firearm enhancement. The parties stipulated the evidence presented during the trial provided a factual basis for defendant’s plea. Petition For Resentencing In 2018, defendant submitted a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.95 using a preprinted form. She checked boxes stating she pled no contest to first