People v. Rosas CA2/4

Filed 3/4/22 P. v. Rosas CA2/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FOUR

THE PEOPLE, B313422 (Los Angeles County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. BA298155)

v.

WILLIAM PASILLAS ROSAS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Ronald S. Coen, Judge. Dismissed. Richard B. Lennon, Executive Director, and Cheryl Lutz, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant William Pasillas Rosas appeals from the trial court’s summary denial of his petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.95.1 Relying on the jury instructions given at trial and our prior opinion in People v. Rosas (Aug. 15, 2011, B223322) [nonpub. opn.] (Rosas I), the court found that defendant was not entitled to relief under section 1170.95 as a matter of law for any of his convictions, including one count of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), and three counts of attempted willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder (§§ 664/187, subd. (a)). (See People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 959 [recent legislative changes to sections 188 and 189, and the addition of section 1170.95, was intended “‘to ensure that murder liability is not imposed on a person who is not the actual killer’” or “‘did not act with the intent to kill’” in the commission of a murder or underlying felony].) 2 Defendant’s appointed counsel found no arguable issues and filed a brief under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende), asking this court to independently review the record. On October 20, 2021, we directed counsel to send the record and a copy of the opening brief to defendant. Both his counsel and this court informed defendant that