People v. Rodriguez CA2/8

Filed 12/12/23 P. v. Rodriguez CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B329556

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA405944) v.

JOE RODRIGUEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Mark K. Hanasono, Judge. Affirmed. Edward H. Schulman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Charles S. Lee and Michael C. Keller, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

**********

Defendant and appellant Joe Rodriguez appeals from the denial of his second petition for resentencing pursuant to former Penal Code section 1170.95. Former section 1170.95 was renumbered and recodified as section 1172.6 with no change in the text. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) For clarity, we refer to former section 1170.95 only by its new designation (section 1172.6). We affirm. BACKGROUND In 2014, defendant was convicted by a jury of one count of first degree murder and two counts of premeditated attempted murder arising from his participation in a gang-related shooting. We affirmed defendant’s conviction with a modification of sentence not relevant to the present appeal. (People v. Rodriguez (Oct. 20, 2016, B265581) [nonpub. opn.].) After the passage of Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.), defendant filed, in propria persona, a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6 as to his conviction for murder. The trial court found that defendant was not entitled to relief as a matter of law because he was found guilty of first degree murder as a direct aider and abettor. The court summarily denied the petition at the prima facie stage. We affirmed the denial. (People v. Rodriguez (Mar. 3, 2021, B305365) [nonpub. opn.].) Thereafter, Senate Bill No. 775 was passed (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) which made further amendments to section 1172.6. As relevant here, Senate Bill No. 775 expanded the scope of relief to those defendants who had been convicted of attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine.