People v. Quintero CA3

Filed 7/26/23 P. v. Quintero CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C097289

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 15F03952)

v.

LAURENCIO QUINTERO,

Defendant and Appellant.

On February 22, 2018, a jury found defendant Laurencio Quintero guilty of first degree murder, willful and malicious discharge of a firearm at an inhabited dwelling, possession of a firearm by a felon, residential burglary, and willful discharge of a firearm in a grossly negligent manner. The jury further found defendant had used a firearm in violation of section 12022.53, subdivisions (b), (c), and (d).1 Finally, in a bifurcated proceeding, the trial court found defendant had suffered a prior strike (§§ 677, subds. (b)-

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code.

1

(i), 1170.12). (People v. Quintero et al. (Oct. 15, 2019, C086794) [nonpub. opn.] (Quintero).) The trial court sentenced defendant to an aggregate prison term of 50 years to life for the murder plus 10 years 8 months consecutive. Defendant appealed, and we struck the jury’s findings as to the section 12022.53 subdivision (b) and (c) enhancements, corrected the custody credit award, and otherwise affirmed the judgment in an unpublished decision. (Quintero, supra, C086794.) On January 17, 2020, defendant filed a petition for resentencing under former section 1170.95 (now section 1172.6).2 The trial court appointed counsel and briefing ensued. On May 1, 2020, the trial court denied defendant’s petition, finding the jury instructions given did not implicate the legislative changes, rather defendant’s jury had been instructed on “aiding and abetting as the sole theory of liability.”3 Defendant does not appear to have appealed this order. Thereafter, on January 21, 2022, defendant filed an in propria persona request on the status of his resentencing petition. On July 21, 2022, the trial court issued an order explaining the procedural history of the case and reaffirming the denial of defendant’s petition for resentencing “because his jury was not instructed on an invalid theory.” On December 2, 2022, this court granted defendant’s request to file an untimely appeal under the constructive filing doctrine. Thereafter, appellate counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo),