People v. Hall CA4/1

Filed 8/18/21 P. v. Hall CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D078174

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. FWV1202970)

MICHAEL ANDRE HALL,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court San Bernardino County, Shahla S. Sabet, Judge. (Retired Judge of San Bernardino Sup. Ct. assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to art. VI, § 6 of the Cal. Const.) Affirmed. Gary V. Crooks, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Michael Pulos, Seth Friedman, and Kathryn Kirschbaum, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In 2013, Michael Hall and a co-defendant were charged with three

counts of murder (Pen. Code,1 § 187, subd. (a)) and multiple other felonies. Hall entered into a plea agreement in which he pleaded guilty to one count of voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)) as a lesser offense of murder and one count of robbery (§ 211). Hall also admitted the crimes were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. In September 2019, Hall filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. Although the statutory mechanism for resentencing is predicated on a conviction for murder, Hall contended his manslaughter conviction should also qualify. The trial court denied the petition on the basis that the manslaughter conviction was not eligible for resentencing under section 1170.95. Hall appeals contending proper statutory construction of section 1170.95 should also allow petitions for resentencing of manslaughter convictions based on guilty pleas to avoid murder convictions that would violate Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) if tried today. He also contends that denying him access to the resentencing system for murder cases would deny him equal protection. Hall acknowledges that all of the published opinions of the Courts of Appeal have rejected both of his arguments. He contends all of the opinions were wrongly decided, including the opinion from this court.