People v. Truong CA4/3

Filed 2/4/22 P. v. Truong CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G059735

v. (Super. Ct. No. 93WF0571)

DUC HONG TRUONG, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Jonathan S. Fish, Judge. Affirmed. Vanessa Place, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland, Assistant Attorney General, Eric A. Swenson and Jennifer B. Truong, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

A quarter century after appellant was sentenced to life in prison without parole for killing Tuan Truong during a robbery, the trial court denied his petition for 1 resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95. He contends the court erred because the record of conviction does not prove he was the person who killed Truong, but we disagree and affirm the court’s ruling. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 1993, appellant and two codefendants went to Truong’s motel room to confront him about an ongoing dispute. Besides Truong, three other men were in the room when appellant’s group burst in with knives. First, they beat Truong and took property belonging to him and his companions. Then, about 10 minutes into the ordeal, appellant stabbed Truong in the leg. Although appellant did not intend to kill Truong, his knife severed Truong’s femoral artery, and he eventually bled to death. Following a jury trial, appellant and his codefendants were convicted of first degree felony murder and four counts of robbery. The jury also found true the special circumstance allegation the murder occurred during the commission of a robbery. With respect to the robbery counts, the jury found all three defendants personally used a knife. However, appellant was the only defendant who was found to have personally used a knife during the murder. He was sentenced to life in prison without parole, and we affirmed the judgment on appeal. (See People v. Vo (July 19, 1995, G015257) [nonpub. opn.].) In 2019, appellant petitioned for resentencing pursuant to section 1170.95. The trial court appointed appellant counsel and held a hearing on the matter. However, it ultimately denied the petition on the basis the record of conviction proved the jury found appellant was the actual killer.