People v. Maddox CA2/1

California Court of Appeal Jan 25, 2023 No. B317642Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the trial court's failure to appoint counsel and follow proper procedures when summarily denying a resentencing petition was harmless error because the record of conviction established as a matter of law that the defendant was the actual killer.

Issues

Whether the trial court's failure to appoint counsel and follow statutory procedures for a resentencing petition under Penal Code section 1172.6 constitutes reversible error when the record of conviction renders the petitioner ineligible for relief as a matter of law.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“By finding that enhancement true, along with the murder conviction, the jury necessarily found that Maddox was the actual killer, rendering him ineligible for relief under former section 1170.95.”

“Therefore, any error in failing to appoint counsel and summarily denying Maddox’s petition at the prima facie stage was harmless.”

Filed 1/25/23 P. v. Maddox CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE

THE PEOPLE, B317642

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. KA088924) v.

QUINTON MADDOX, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mike Camacho, Judge. Affirmed. Tracy J. Dressner, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, David E. Madeo and Nicholas J. Webster, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. ____________________

Quinton Maddox appeals from an order summarily denying, without appointing counsel, his petition for resentencing under Penal Code former section 1170.95.1 We affirm. BACKGROUND A jury convicted Maddox of second degree murder in 2011. In our opinion on his direct appeal, we set forth the following facts, which we include here solely to provide background and context for the parties’ arguments; we do not rely on them to resolve this appeal: On March 26, 2009, eight to 10 people, including Maddox and Ocie May, gathered in an alley in the City of Covina. A fight broke out between May and another individual, at the end of which Maddox drew a gun and shot May, killing him. (People v. Maddox (Nov. 8, 2012, B233872) [nonpub. opn.].) An information charged Maddox with one count of first degree murder and alleged pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivision (d) that Maddox personally and intentionally used a firearm, which proximately caused great bodily injury and death. On the firearm enhancement, the jury was instructed with CALCRIM No. 3150, which stated that to find the allegation true, the jury had to find that “the People also have proved the defendant’s act caused great bodily injury to or the death of a person.” The jury was not instructed on the felony murder rule or any theory of vicarious liability. Maddox’s first jury, in a trial presided over by Judge Mike Camacho, found him not guilty of first degree murder, and

People v. Maddox CA2/1

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, B317642

QUINTON MADDOX, JR.,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

CHANEY, J.

WEINGART, J.

AI Brief