People v. Lee CA3

Filed 12/13/21 P. v. Lee CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C093754

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. CR56910)

v.

DARREN LEE,

Defendant and Appellant.

In 1980, defendant Darren Lee was convicted of two counts of murder with firearm enhancements found true, three counts of robbery, one count of burglary, and one count of assault. The jury instructions allowed for conviction under either the natural and probable consequences doctrine of conspiracy liability for first degree murder and/or the first degree felony-murder rule as it existed in 1980, without any finding that defendant was the actual killer, intended to kill, or was a major participant in the underlying felony who acted with reckless indifference to human life. In 2019, defendant filed a petition

1

for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code 1 section 1170.95. The trial court denied the petition on the basis that defendant is ineligible for section 1170.95 relief as he failed to set forth a prima facie showing. Defendant appeals, arguing he demonstrated prima facie entitlement to relief, and that the trial court should have issued an order to show cause and conducted an evidentiary hearing. We conclude defendant did make a prima facie showing and will reverse for the trial court to issue an order to show cause under section 1170.95, subdivision (c). BACKGROUND For the reasons established in our discussion, we need not provide considerable detail of the factual background of defendant’s crime. In 1979, defendant, Marty Spears (aka Marty Jackson), Ron Anderson, and Daniel Geisler planned and executed the robbery and assault of Leonard L. Defendant was familiar with the residence where the crimes took place, and prior to their commission defendant explained to Geisler and Jackson how to best carry out the crime, including by directing them to bring firearms. Also, in 1979, defendant and Jackson went to the home of a man and woman and gained entry by asking for gasoline. They then engaged in a burglary, robbery, and double homicide. Defendant claimed that Jackson had “gone crazy” and hit the man with a baseball bat and stabbed both the man and the woman, and that they had only gone to the home for the robbery. Defendant claimed that when Jackson began attacking the woman, defendant ran from the home. The jury instructions included conspiracy liability for “first degree” murder, based on a conspiracy to commit robbery or burglary and an act in furtherance of that conspiracy for which first degree murder is “an ordinary and probable result,” the