People v. Rodriguez CA2/2

California Court of Appeal Oct 21, 2021 No. B309105Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that while the trial court erred by summarily denying the defendant's section 1170.95 petition without appointing counsel, the error was harmless because the record of conviction established as a matter of law that the defendant was ineligible for relief.

Issues

Did the trial court err in summarily denying the defendant's section 1170.95 petition without appointing counsel?
Was the summary denial of the petition prejudicial to the defendant?
Did the defendant's murder conviction rest on theories of liability invalidated by section 1170.95?

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the trial court erred in summarily denying defendant’s petition.”

“the record forecloses defendant’s entitlement to relief under section 1170.95 as a matter of law”

Filed 10/21/21 P. v. Rodriguez CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B309105

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. MA044680) v.

CARLOS RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Los Angeles Superior Court, Hayden Zacky, Judge. Affirmed.

Heather J. Manolakas, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Roberta L. Davis, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ****** Carlos Rodriguez (defendant) argues that the trial court erred in denying his petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95.1 There was no prejudicial error, so we affirm. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Facts Just after school let out on a Monday in October 2008, defendant and two others in an SUV drove up alongside three pedestrians on the sidewalk. Someone in the SUV asked the pedestrians, “Where you from?” When one of the pedestrians answered with the name of a street gang, one of the SUV’s inhabitants yelled out the name of the rival gang and opened fire at the three pedestrians. One of them was shot and killed. (People v. Rodriguez, Mar. 28, 2013, B235978 [nonpub. opn.], at [2]

People v. Rodriguez CA2/2

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION TWO

THE PEOPLE, B309105

CARLOS RODRIGUEZ,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief