People v. Alexander CA3

Filed 1/18/24 P. v. Alexander CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,

Plaintiff and Respondent, C097596

v. (Super. Ct. No. 02F08949)

DARRYL KEITH ALEXANDER,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Darryl Keith Alexander appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for resentencing under Penal Code former section 1170.95, now 1172.6.1 His appellate counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) and People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and asked that we exercise our discretion to review the record for arguable issues on appeal.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to section 1172.6 without substantive change. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) We refer to section 1172.6 throughout this opinion.

1

This court notified defendant he had 30 days to file a supplemental brief raising any argument he wanted us to consider. Defendant filed a supplemental brief arguing the evidence is insufficient to establish that he had the specific intent to attempt to murder the victim. Finding no merit in the contention, we will affirm the trial court’s order. BACKGROUND In October 2022, four members of the Sureño gang were hanging out in a car parked behind a strip mall. As the victim and another individual entered a store and returned to the car, they saw two other individuals standing by the store entrance. After a few minutes, the two men who had been at the store entrance drove past the Sureño members, turned around, stopped behind them, asked “How’s that Norte life?” and fired six shots at the Sureño car. The bullets broke car windows and two bullets were later found lodged in the passenger side back panel of the vehicle. The victim, who was sitting in the rear seat on the passenger side of the car, was hit in the head by a bullet, but he survived. One of the Sureño members told police that the driver of the other vehicle and the shooter were members of the Norteño gang. A police officer searched the driver’s bedroom and found six spent bullet casings inside a plastic baggie. Defendant’s fingerprints were found on the baggie. The driver’s older brother testified that the driver and defendant were friends, and defendant had lived with his family for several years. The day of the shooting, defendant and the driver were at the family home. Defendant told the brother he shot someone. Defendant said he was the only shooter. A jury found defendant guilty of attempted murder (§§ 187/664) and shooting at an occupied vehicle (§ 246). As to both counts, the jury also found true a personal gun use enhancement (§ 12022.53, subd. (d)) and a gang enhancement (§ 186.22, subd. (b)(1)). In July 2004, the trial court sentenced defendant to 40 years to life in