People v. Serpa CA2/2

Filed 2/24/22 P. v. Serpa CA2/2 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B314661

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. A093412) v.

ALLAN E. SERPA,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT:

Allan E. Serpa (defendant) appeals the trial court’s denial 1 of his motion for relief under Penal Code section 1170.95. Defendant’s attorney filed a brief raising no issues and asked this

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated.

court to independently review the record. Defendant submitted a supplemental brief on his own behalf. Having considered defendant’s contentions of error and having conducted our own examination of the record, we are satisfied that no arguable issue exists which would call into question defendant’s ineligibility for resentencing relief under section 1170.95. We accordingly affirm the trial court’s order. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND I. Facts A. The underlying crime One morning in the summer of 1985, a concerned neighbor checked on Jean Wildish at her apartment in Santa Monica and found Wildish’s body in the apartment’s bedroom. Wildish was naked from the waist down and was positioned with her knees on the floor and her head on the bed. There was blood all over the floor. An autopsy confirmed that Wildish had died as a result of blunt force trauma to the head. Defendant and a friend had planned to rob Wildish’s apartment, but when she awoke, either defendant or his friend hit Wildish over the head with a hammer. B. Conviction and appeal In April 1987, a jury found defendant guilty of first degree murder based on a felony-murder theory, and found true the special circumstance that Wildish was murdered during the commission of a robbery and burglary. The jury had been instructed on the then governing law—specifically, that the felony-murder special circumstance required the jury to find that defendant “intended to kill a human being or intended to aid another in the killing of a human being.” He was sentenced to