People v. Mendivil CA3

Filed 9/30/21 P. v. Mendivil CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C091561

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 11F00055)

v.

JEREMY ANTHONY MENDIVIL,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jeremy Anthony Mendivil appeals the trial court’s order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1170.95, arguing the trial court erred when it found his voluntary manslaughter conviction ineligible for relief under the statute. We will affirm the order.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

BACKGROUND In 2014, the prosecution charged defendant and his codefendant with murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), and alleged defendant was armed with a firearm (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)). The information alleged the codefendant personally discharged the firearm and caused the victim’s death. (§ 12022.53, subd. (d).) Defendant pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)) and admitted he was a principal in an offense in which another principal was armed, in exchange for a stipulated sentence of 12 years. Consistent with the agreement, the trial court sentenced defendant to a term of 12 years in state prison. In 2019, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. The trial court appointed counsel for defendant and received briefing from both parties. The trial court denied the petition in a written order, explaining that because defendant had been convicted of voluntary manslaughter, he “fails to make the threshold prima facie showing he is eligible for resentencing under section 1170.[9]5.” DISCUSSION I Section 1170.95 and Voluntary Manslaughter Defendant argues the language in section 1170.95 compels the conclusion that “section 1170.95 applies to defendants who pled to manslaughter in lieu of trial for murder.” While acknowledging that all current published case law has agreed section 1170.95 does not apply to voluntary manslaughter convictions, defendant urges us to adopt a contrary view. We decline the invitation. “ ‘If the language [of a statute] is clear, courts must generally follow its plain meaning unless a literal interpretation would result in absurd consequences the Legislature did not intend.’ ” (People v. Flores (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 985, 992 (Flores).)