People v. Thompson CA2/2

Filed 5/30/23 P. v. Thompson CA2/2 Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 TWO

THE PEOPLE, B309117

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. v. NA091280)

MATHEW ARLIN THOMPSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT: Pursuant to the April 12, 2023, order of the California Supreme Court, we vacate our June 22, 2021, decision in this matter. Upon reconsideration in light of People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 232–233 & fn. 6 (Delgadillo), we exercise our discretion to conduct an independent review of the record. Based on that independent review, we affirm the trial court’s

order denying the Penal Code section 1172.61 (former § 1170.95)2 petition filed by defendant and appellant Mathew Arlin Thompson. BACKGROUND In 2013, a jury found defendant guilty of one count of second degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a); count 1), two counts of attempted murder (§§ 664, 187, subd. (a); counts 6 & 7), and one count of shooting at an inhabited dwelling (§ 246; count 3). (People v. Thompson (May 19, 2015, B252528) [nonpub. opn.], p. 2.) The jury also found true gang and firearm enhancement allegations. (Ibid.) The trial court sentenced defendant to a total term of 140 years to life in state prison and imposed various fines and fees. (Id. at pp. 2, 14.) On direct appeal, we remanded the matter for the limited purpose of resentencing. (People v. Thompson, supra, B252528, at p. 16.) We directed the trial court to “strike the 20-year firearm enhancement on count 1; strike the 15-years-to-life gang enhancements on counts 3, 6 and 7; exercise its sentencing discretion on the sentence range for count 3; modify the sentences on counts 6 and 7 to indeterminate life sentences; and strike the $1,000 assessment and surcharge.” (Ibid.) We affirmed the judgment in all other respects. (Ibid.) Defendant filed a petition for resentencing under section 1172.6 and was appointed counsel. The People filed an