People v. Patton CA2/5

Filed 1/3/23 P. v. Patton CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIVE

THE PEOPLE, B317872

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. BA226937)

DERRICK PATTON,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, George G. Lomeli, Judge. Dismissed. John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant Derrick Patton (defendant), along with co- defendants Melvin Tate and Tyrone Miller, was charged with one count of murder for the killing of Rene Franco during the commission of a robbery, and one count of second degree robbery for victim Ana Saravia, both of which occurred on May 26, 2000. Defendant was also charged, in the same information, with the second degree robbery of Miguel Deanda on May 23, 2000. The information, among other things, alleged all three crimes were committed for the benefit of, at the direction of, and in association with a criminal street gang, and with the specific intent to promote criminal conduct by gang members, and that a principal discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury and death to the victims. Defendant was convicted on all charges and sentencing enhancements were found true. The trial court sentenced defendant to life in prison without the possibility of parole, plus an indeterminate consecutive term of 25 years to life and a determinate term of 13 years. Defendant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the superior court on December 17, 2021. Defendant claimed new evidence from co-defendant Miller warranted overturning his convictions. Specifically, the habeas corpus petition attached a declaration from defendant’s attorney who stated he spoke to co- defendant Miller over the telephone; Miller asserted facts related to the crime, some of which disputed or contradicted co-defendant Tate’s testimony at trial; and Miller agreed to meet with an investigator and present a statement. The trial court denied the petition for habeas corpus, finding defendant failed to establish a prima facie case for relief. The court explained that even if a declaration from co-defendant