People v. Vasquez CA3

Filed 11/16/22 P. v. Vasquez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C094256

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 95F09680 )

v.

RICARDO VASQUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Ricardo Vasquez appeals from the trial court’s March 2020 order denying his petition for resentencing brought pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.6 (formerly section 1170.95).1 The court found defendant ineligible for relief as a matter of

1 Further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Effective June 30, 2022, long after defendant filed his petition, the Legislature renumbered section 1170.95 to section 1172.6 without substantive change. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) We will refer to the section where possible by its new numbering.

1

law by virtue of the jury’s special circumstance finding, and alternatively, that this court’s previous opinion established defendant was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life under the law as clarified in People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788 and People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522. On appeal, the parties agree, as do we, that the trial court’s order cannot stand.2 We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. BACKGROUND Defendant’s Convictions On July 8, 1997, a jury found defendant guilty of first degree murder (§§ 187/189) with a robbery special circumstance (§ 190, subd. (a)(17)), robbery (§ 211), assault with a deadly weapon (§ 245, subd. (a)(1)), and attempted robbery (§§ 664/211). The jury also found true that defendant had personally used a knife. (§ 12022, subd. (b).) As relevant here, the jury was instructed on multiple theories of murder, including felony murder. The murder verdict form did not require the jury to identify the theory on which it relied. We upheld these convictions in an unpublished decision issued in 1998. (People v. Vasquez (Oct. 16, 1998; C026759) [nonpub. opn.].) Legal Background Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill No. 1437), which became effective on January 1, 2019, was enacted “to amend the felony murder rule and the natural and probable consequences doctrine, as it relates to murder, to ensure that murder liability is not imposed on a person who is not the actual killer, did not act with the intent to kill, or was not a major participant in the underlying felony who acted with reckless indifference to human life.” (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 1, subd. (f).) The