People v. Orozco CA2/6

Filed 1/27/22 P. v. Orozco 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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. B311494 (Super. Ct. No. TA139085) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County)

v.

MARCOS ANTONIO OROZCO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appellant Marcos Antonio Orozco was the “wheel man” in a gang related robbery of a liquor store in 2015. He was charged with murder and, pursuant to a negotiated settlement, pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter. In 2019, he filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1170.95. The trial court summarily denied the petition finding section 1170.95, by its express terms, only applied to individuals convicted of murder. Section 1170.95 was subsequently amended. Effective January 1, 2022 it applied to individuals, like appellant, who were convicted

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

of voluntary manslaughter. Accordingly, we shall reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s petition and remand the matter for further proceedings in accordance with section 1170.95 as amended. STATEMENT OF FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Appellant pleaded no contest prior to a preliminary hearing. The relevant facts, therefore, are derived from the probation report. On November 16, 2015, appellant’s codefendants Raul Hidalgo and Luis Gomez entered a liquor store, grabbed several items, and attempted to leave through the rear exit. One of them was detained by a store employee. Employees Brian Jaime and Alfredo Alvarado followed the other man out of the store until he reached a vehicle driven by appellant. When someone in the vehicle pointed a gun at Jaime and Alvarado, they retreated and returned to the store. The detained accomplice told them “[y]ou’ll regret this, this is 18 Street, this is our hood and you’ll regret this. You don’t know who you’re fucking with.” He was tragically prophetic. The vehicle driven by appellant began circling the store. An unidentified individual got out of the vehicle, entered the store, and repeatedly shot Jaime and Alvarado. Alvarado was killed and Jaime was seriously injured. The shooter and detained accomplice fled in the vehicle driven by appellant. Appellant was charged with murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), attempted murder (§§ 187, subd. (a), 664) robbery (§ 211), assault with a semiautomatic firearm (§ 245, subd. (b)), dissuading a witness by force or threat (§ 136.1, subd. (c)(1)), and voluntary manslaughter (§ 192, subd. (a)), with gang and firearm use allegations. In June 2018, appellant pleaded no contest to voluntary manslaughter and admitted the crime was committed