People v. Arreguin

Filed 3/9/23 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

THE PEOPLE, 2d Crim. No. B304838 (Super. Ct. No. CR31011) Plaintiff and Respondent, (Ventura County)

v.

JOSE ARREGUIN,

Defendant and Appellant.

Jose Arreguin appeals an order denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to former Penal Code section 1170.95 (renumbered section 1172.6 without substantive change).1 We reverse the order and remand for an evidentiary hearing pursuant to section 1172.6. (People v. Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th 698, 717-718 [true finding on a felony-murder special circumstance allegation rendered prior to People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522 and People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788 does

1 All statutory references are to the Penal Code.

not preclude a petitioner from showing eligibility for section 1172.6 relief].) We are sympathetic to the views expressed by our colleague Justice Yegan in his well-reasoned concurring opinion. Strong, however, does not appear to permit a harmless error application. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Arreguin’s resentencing petition concerned his 1993 conviction of first degree murder (count 1) and attempted robbery (count 2), with findings of a special circumstance murder committed during an attempted robbery and a principal armed with a firearm. (§§ 187, subd. (a), 189, 664, 211, 190.2, subd. (a)(17)(A), 12022, subd. (a)(1).) The trial court sentenced Arreguin for the murder conviction to life without the possibility of parole, plus one year for the firearm enhancement. Arreguin appealed. We rejected arguments of instructional error and insufficiency of the evidence and affirmed. (People v. Arreguin (Dec. 12, 1994, B077312) [nonpub. opn.].) On September 20, 2019, Arreguin filed a section 1172.6 petition for resentencing alleging that his murder conviction rested upon the felony murder or the natural and probable consequences doctrines. The trial court appointed counsel for Arreguin and permitted the parties to file written arguments regarding resentencing. Following briefing, the court denied the petition. In a thorough and thoughtful ruling, the court decided that Arreguin was ineligible for resentencing as a major participant in the crime who acted with reckless indifference to human life. (§ 189, subd. (e)(3).) The court did not issue an order to show cause or hold an evidentiary hearing prior to ruling.