People v. Wilson CA4/1

Filed 2/2/22 P. v. Wilson CA4/1 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court OPINION AFTER TRANSFER FROM CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D075612

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCN067569)

ANTONY GLYN WILSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Harry M. Elias, Judge. Reversed and remanded with instructions. Anthony J. Dain, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Xavier Becerra and Rob Bonta, Attorneys General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Lynne G. McGinnis and Quisteen S. Shum, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. In March 1998, a jury found Antony Glyn Wilson guilty of three counts of attempted murder, among other things.

The court sentenced him to 32 years. In February 2019, Wilson filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to

Penal Code1 section 1170.95. The trial court denied the petition, stating Wilson was ineligible for relief because he was not convicted of first or second degree murder. Wilson appealed, and this court affirmed the denial of the petition, relying on a body of case law that held section 1170.95 and Senate Bill No. 1437 (Stats. 2018, ch.1015) (Senate Bill 1437) did not apply to cases such as Wilson’s. (People v. Wilson (Nov. 20, 2019, D075612) [nonpub. opn.].) Wilson petitioned for review, and the Supreme Court granted it, then transferred the case to this court to reconsider in light of the newly enacted Senate Bill No. 775 (Stats. 2021, ch. 551) (Senate Bill 775), which became effective January 1, 2022. We requested and received supplemental briefs on the impact of Senate Bill 775 on this case. Having now reconsidered the case, including the agreement of the parties that the case should be reversed and remanded, we will reverse the order denying the petition for resentencing and remand the matter to the superior court with directions to appoint counsel for Wilson and hold proceedings consistent with section 1170.95. DISCUSSION Prior to the enactment of Senate Bill 775, courts were divided over the question of whether a person convicted of attempted murder was eligible for resentencing under Senate Bill 1437 and section 1170.95. (People v. Alaybue (2020) 51 Cal.App.5th 207, 222.) Senate Bill 775 addresses this conflict. The Legislature’s stated purpose, in part, in enacting Senate Bill 775 was to clarify that “persons who were convicted of attempted murder or manslaughter under a theory of felony murder and the natural probable