People v. Ware CA2/7

Filed 9/20/23 P. v. Ware CA2/7 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 SEVEN

THE PEOPLE, B326925

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA220696) v.

JOSEPH WARE,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, George G. Lomeli, Judge. Affirmed. Jeffrey S. Kross, under appointment by the Court of Appeal; Joseph Ware, in pro. per., for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. _______________________

Joseph Ware was found guilty following a jury trial in 2002 on two counts of attempted murder of a peace officer (Pen. Code, §§ 187, subd. (a), 664, subd. (e))1 and two counts of assault with a semiautomatic firearm on a peace officer (§ 245, subd. (d)(2)) with true findings that Ware had personally and intentionally discharged a firearm in committing the offenses (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)). The jury found not true the allegation the attempted murders were committed willfully, deliberately and with premeditation. We affirmed Ware’s convictions on direct appeal. (People v. Ware (Aug. 25, 2004, B167166) [nonpub. opn.].) On November 17, 2022 the superior court denied Ware’s petition for resentencing under section 1172.6 (former section 1170.95) without issuing an order to show cause, ruling Ware was ineligible for relief as a matter of law because Ware had been tried and convicted as the actual shooter and the jury had not been instructed on the natural and probable consequences doctrine or any other theory under which malice could have been imputed to him. No arguable issues have been identified following review of the record by Ware’s appointed appellate counsel. We also have identified no arguable issues after our own independent review of the record and analysis of the contentions presented by Ware in his supplemental brief. We affirm. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 1. Ware’s Conviction for Attempted Murder The People’s evidence at Ware’s trial was that Ware, a guest at a barbecue being held in the back parking lot of an apartment complex where his mother and sister lived, was asked