California Court of Appeal Mar 4, 2022 No. E075834AUnpublished
Filed 3/4/22 P. v. Hernandez CA4/2 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION TWO
THE PEOPLE,
Plaintiff and Respondent, E075834
v. (Super.Ct.No. RIF132924)
RUBEN JULIO HERNANDEZ, OPINION
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. John D. Molloy, Judge.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Theresa Osterman Stevenson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
Rob Bonta and Xavier Becerra, Attorneys General, Lance E. Winters, Chief
Assistant Attorney General, Julie L. Garland and Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorneys
General, Arlene A. Sevidal, Lynne G. McGinnis, and Elizabeth M. Kuchar, Deputy
Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
1
I
INTRODUCTION
In 2012, pursuant to a plea agreement, defendant and appellant Ruben Julio
Hernandez pleaded guilty to second degree attempted murder (Pen. Code, 1 §§ 664/187,
legislation . . . ¶ (a) [c]larifies that persons who were convicted of attempted murder or
manslaughter under a theory of felony murder and the natural [and] probable
consequences doctrine are permitted the same relief as those persons convicted of murder
under the same theories”].)
Defendant contends and the People agree that the trial court’s summary denial of
the resentencing petition must be reversed, and the matter remanded. Having reviewed
the record on appeal, we also agree. On remand, the trial court must determine whether
defendant has stated a prima facie case for relief under section 1170.95 as to his
attempted murder conviction. (§ 1170.95, subd. (c).) If the court finds a prima facie case
is stated, it shall issue an order to show cause and hold a hearing “to determine whether to
vacate the . . . attempted murder . . . conviction and to recall the sentence and resentence
[defendant] on any remaining counts in the same manner as if [he] had not previously
been sentenced, provided that the new sentence, if any, is not greater than the initial
sentence.” (§ 1170.95 subd. (d)(1).)
4
III
DISPOSITION
The order denying defendant’s petition for resentencing under section 1170.95 is
reversed, and the matter is remanded to the superior court. Upon remand, the superior
court shall conduct further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS
CODRINGTON Acting P. J. We concur:
SLOUGH J.
FIELDS J.
5
AI Brief
AI-generated · verify before citing
Holding. The court held that a defendant convicted of attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences theory is eligible for resentencing relief under Penal Code section 1170.95, as amended by Senate Bill No. 775.
Issues
Whether a defendant convicted of attempted murder is eligible for resentencing relief under Penal Code section 1170.95 following the enactment of Senate Bill No. 775.