People v. Hoang CA4/3

Filed 4/17/23 P. v. Hoang CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G061595

v. (Super. Ct. No. 03WF1095)

HUNG LINH HOANG, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Jonathan S. Fish, Judge. Affirmed. James R. Bostwick, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

This is the second appeal in which appellant has challenged an order 1 denying his request for resentencing under former Penal Code section 1170.95. As we did in the first appeal, we affirm the trial court’s denial order utilizing the review procedures set forth in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). Wende review applies in this case because appointed counsel filed a brief saying his thorough review of the record failed to reveal any arguable issues to raise on appellant’s behalf. At our invitation, appellant then filed supplemental briefing on his own behalf. However, having considered that briefing, and having reviewed the entire record as required under Wende, we conclude there are no arguable grounds for disturbing the trial court’s ruling. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2004, appellant was convicted of attempted premeditated murder and street terrorism. (§§ 664/187, subd. (a); 186.22, subd. (a).) The jury also found true allegations he personally used a firearm and acted for the benefit of a criminal street gang. (§§ 12022.53, subds. (a) & (b), 12022.5, subd. (a), 186.22, subd. (b).) The trial court sentenced him to life in prison with the possibility of parole for the attempted murder, plus 10 years. On appeal, we affirmed the judgment. (People v. Hoang (Apr. 28, 2006, G034779) [nonpub. opn.].) However, on subsequent habeas review, we reversed appellant’s street terrorism conviction because he acted alone when trying to murder the victim. (In re Hoang (Dec. 29, 2016, G052501) [nonpub. opn.].) In 2019, appellant filed his first petition for resentencing under former section 1170.95. After the petition was summarily denied, we affirmed in a Wende opinion on two grounds. First, at that time, section 1170.95 did not apply to the crime of attempted murder. Second, appellant’s conviction for that offense was not based on