People v. Ladd CA2/6

Filed 12/22/21 P. v. Ladd CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B312382 (Super. Ct. No. TA130215) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

CHRISTOPHER LADD,

Defendant and Appellant.

Christopher Ladd appeals from a postjudgment order denying his petition for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1170.95. In 2014, a jury convicted Ladd and codefendants Kevin Phillips and Marvin Vital, of first degree murder (§§ 187, subd. (a), 189) and found true the special circumstance allegation that the murder was intentionally committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(22)). The jury also found true allegations that a principal discharged a firearm causing death and that the murder was committed for the benefit of a

1 All unlabeled statutory references are to the Penal Code.

criminal street gang (§§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)(A), 12022.53, subds. (b)-(e)). Appellant was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole plus 25 years to life. The judgment against him was subsequently affirmed on appeal with modifications. (People v. Phillips (June 20, 2018, B272498) [nonpub. opn.].)2 In March 2021, appellant, represented by retained counsel, filed a petition for resentencing under section 1170.95. The trial court summarily denied the petition after recognizing that the jury was not instructed on felony murder or the natural and probable consequences theory as to the murder charge. The court also noted that in finding the gang special circumstance allegation true, the jury necessarily found that appellant acted with the requisite intent to kill. Appellant’s subsequent motion for reconsideration was also denied. We appointed counsel to represent appellant in this appeal. After reviewing the record, counsel filed a brief raising no issues. On September 14, 2021, we advised appellant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. We received no response. Several courts of appeal have recognized that the independent review mandated by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), does not apply to an appeal from the denial of a section 1170.95 resentencing petition because it is not the defendant’s first appeal as a matter of right. (See, e.g., People v.