People v. Robson CA3

Filed 11/18/22 P. v. Robson CA3 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C089152

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 04F06813)

v. OPINION ON TRANSFER

JUSTIN WAYNE ROBSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

On June 28, 2006, a jury convicted defendant Justin Wayne Robson of first degree murder with a special circumstance that he had been engaged in robbery (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 190.2, subd. (a)(17))1 and found true the allegation that he had personally used a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)). The jury also found true that defendant’s codefendant, Ira Gordan, had discharged a firearm causing death. Thereafter, defendant was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole, plus an additional

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

determinate term of 10 years. We affirmed this judgment in People v. Gordon et al. (July 27, 2010, C056183) (nonpub. opn.). On January 7, 2019, defendant sought resentencing pursuant to former section 1170.952 in light of changes brought about by Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.), which was summarily denied by the trial court. Our original opinion in this appeal concluded that while defendant had filed a deficient petition in propria persona, we would nonetheless address the merits of his claims on appeal in the name of judicial efficiency. We concluded on the merits that defendant could not state a prima facie case for relief and affirmed the trial court’s order. (People v. Robson (Jan. 6, 2021, C089152) [nonpub. opn.] (Robson).) Defendant filed a petition for review with the California Supreme Court, which directed this court to vacate our previous decision and reconsider the matter in light of People v. Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th 698 (Strong) and People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952 (Lewis). Having done so, we conclude the trial court’s order must be vacated, and the matter remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. BACKGROUND Factual Background According to our opinion in Gordon, defendant and his two codefendants, Gordon and Jamaur Wilson, were in the parking lot of a liquor store when the murder victim drove up with his girlfriend. The victim and his girlfriend went into the store. As they returned, Gordon entered the car, sat in the rear passenger seat, and asked the victim if he would give them a ride. Defendant then got into the rear seat behind the victim. Wilson