People v. Valdez CA4/1

Filed 1/4/22 P. v. Valdez CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D078638

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCN244669)

IRWIN DWAYNE VALDEZ et al.,

Defendants and Appellants.

APPEALS from orders of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Aaron H. Katz, Judge. Reversed and remanded with directions. Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Irwin Dwayne Valdez. Reed Webb, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant Adan Valdez. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina, and Robin Urbanski, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

In 2009, Irwin Valdez (Irwin) and Adan Valdez (Adan)1 were both charged with murder in the same case. Both entered into plea bargains under the terms of which both appellants pleaded guilty to voluntary

manslaughter (Pen. Code,2 § 192, subd. (a)). Adan stipulated to a term of 15 years in prison. Irwin agreed to a term of 23 years in prison. In 2019, Appellants each filed petitions for resentencing under section 1170.95. The court appointed counsel and received briefing. The court then denied the petitions, finding convictions for manslaughter were not eligible for resentencing under section 1170.95. Both Appellants have appealed the denial of their resentencing petitions. While this case has been pending, the Legislature enacted Senate Bill No. 775 (Stats. 2021, ch. 551) (Senate Bill 775) (effective January 1, 2022). The bill amends section 1170.95 as relevant here, making convictions for manslaughter obtained as lesser offenses of murder, eligible for resentencing. Senate Bill 775 was not in effect when the trial court ruled on the petitions. After Senate Bill 775 was enacted, we requested and received supplemental briefs on the effect of the new legislation. The Appellants contend and the Attorney General agrees, the orders must be reversed, and