People v. Sanchez CA3

Filed 9/2/21 P. v. Sanchez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sutter) ----

THE PEOPLE, C091812

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CRF021913)

v.

JUAN JOSE SANCHEZ, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

A jury found defendant Juan Jose Sanchez, Jr., guilty of first degree murder in 2004. In 2020, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.951 and requested the appointment of counsel. The trial court found defendant ineligible for relief and denied the petition without holding a hearing. Defendant appeals, arguing the trial court did not follow proper procedures when it denied the petition

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

without appointing counsel or receiving briefing. We conclude any error was harmless and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant and codefendant Daniel Murillo drove the victim out to an orchard and shot and killed him. (People v. Sanchez (Oct. 12, 2006, C049734) [nonpub. opn.].)2 The jury found defendant guilty of first degree murder (§§ 187, subd. (a), 189), sustained a lying-in-wait special circumstance (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(15)), and found true the allegation that defendant was vicariously armed during the offense (§ 12022, subd. (d)). The trial court sentenced defendant to life without the possibility of parole with a consecutive three-year term for the firearm enhancement. Defendant appealed the conviction, asserting the lying-in-wait special circumstance could not apply to him because he only aided and abetted the victim’s murder and was not the actual killer. We disagreed, saying, “[d]efendant clearly intended to kill the victim, and there is ample evidence that the murder was committed by means of lying in wait. We conclude the lying-in-wait special circumstance applies to defendant pursuant to section 190.2, subdivision (c) as an aider and abettor with the intent to kill.” (People v. Sanchez, supra, C049734 [at p. 6].) Thus, we affirmed the conviction. On January 14, 2020, following the enactment of Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015) (Senate Bill 1437), defendant filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. In the petition, defendant averred that a complaint or information had been filed against him that allowed the prosecution to proceed under a theory of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine; he had been convicted of murder under one of those theories; and he could not now be convicted of murder based on the changes made to section 188 and 189 by Senate Bill