People v. Pimentel CA4/3

Filed 6/28/23 P. v. Pimentel 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G061526

v. (Super. Ct. No. 01CF0502)

JORGE ALBERTO PIMENTEL, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Richard M. King, Judge. Affirmed. Steven A. Torres, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, Steve Oetting and Michael Dolida, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

* * *

“A person convicted of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine . . . , attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine, or manslaughter may file a petition with the court . . . to have the petitioner’s murder, attempted murder, or manslaughter conviction vacated and . . . be 1 resentenced . . . .” (Pen. Code, § 1172.6, subd. (a), italics added.) In 2022, defendant Jorge Alberto Pimentel filed a section 1172.6 petition with the trial court seeking to have his 2002 attempted murder conviction vacated and to be resentenced. But Pimentel was not convicted of attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine as required by the statute. (See § 1172.6. subd. (a).) Thus, we affirm the trial court’s order denying Pimentel’s petition.

I