People v. King CA1/1

Filed 2/3/23 P. v. King CA1/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, A165028 v. WARREN JOSEPH KING, (Contra Costa County Super. Ct. No. 5-100326-8) Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Warren King appeals from the denial of his petition for resentencing under Penal Code former section 1170.95, now section 1172.6, based on changes to the law of murder made by Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017– 2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill 1437).1 King’s appellate counsel filed a Wende2 brief asking this court for an independent review of the record to determine whether any arguable issues exist. Recently, our state Supreme Court held that there is no right to Wende review in section 1172.6 appeals, but it established a procedural framework to follow when counsel finds no arguable issues. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 221–222 (Delgadillo).) Under that framework, we gave notice to King that he had the right to file a supplemental letter or brief or his

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.

1

appeal could be dismissed. (See id. at pp. 231–232.) He filed a letter raising several issues, requiring us to issue an opinion evaluating them. (See id. at p. 232.) We conclude that none of King’s claims have merit and affirm. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Based on the 2009 killing of John Lyles, a jury convicted King of one count of second degree murder and found true that he personally and intentionally discharged a firearm causing death. The jury also convicted King of being a felon in possession of a firearm, and the trial court found that he had three prior serious-felony convictions.3 On appeal, this division struck one of the serious-felony enhancements but otherwise affirmed, resulting in a sentence of 50 years to life in prison.4 (People v. King (Feb. 28, 2012, A130713) [nonpub. opn.].) In July 2019, King filed his resentencing petition, in which he declared that he was convicted of murder on a theory of felony murder or under the natural and probable consequences doctrine and could no longer be convicted of murder because of changes to the law made by Senate Bill 1437. The petition was inadvertently overlooked, and it remained pending for over two years before the trial court appointed counsel for King and set a briefing schedule.