People v. Collins CA3

Filed 1/31/24 P. v. Collins CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C097996

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 10F07391)

v.

LATICE COLLINS,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Latice Collins appeals the trial court’s denial of his resentencing petition under Penal Code1 section 1172.62 after an evidentiary hearing. Defendant

1 All undesignated section references are to the Penal Code. 2 Effective June 30, 2022, former section 1170.95 was recodified without substantive change to section 1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) Defendant filed his petition under former section 1170.95, but we will refer to the current section 1172.6 throughout this opinion.

1

argues there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court’s order. We disagree and affirm. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Defendant and Nathaniel Carter were charged with the robbery and murder of Steven C. Before trial, defendant pled guilty to first degree murder and received a sentence of 26 years to life with the possibility of parole. Defendant later petitioned for resentencing under section 1172.6. Following defendant’s first evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the petition. (People v. Collins (Jan. 6, 2022, C093514) [nonpub. opn.].) We reversed the denial because the trial court applied the wrong standard of review. (Ibid.) At defendant’s second evidentiary hearing, the order that is the subject of this appeal, the prosecution introduced transcripts from Carter’s trial and transcripts from defendant’s first evidentiary hearing. Defendant called S.C., one of the witnesses from Carter’s trial, to testify on his behalf. The following facts were revealed by the evidence admitted at defendant’s second evidentiary hearing. Steven was a cannabis dealer in Sacramento. About three months before his murder, Steven befriended Danisha H. Danisha and her friend Kayla T. would often obtain cannabis from Steven. On the night of October 29, 2010, Kayla and Danisha decided they wanted cannabis. Danisha called Steven and made plans to meet him at a grocery store parking lot. Kayla and Danisha ran into defendant, defendant’s girlfriend Dejohng Taylor, and Carter, who were getting out of Taylor’s car. According to Kayla, Carter and defendant were excited and taking bandanas off their faces. Based on their conversation, both Danisha and Kayla believed Carter and defendant had just committed or were planning to commit a robbery. Defendant and Carter approached and asked Danisha if she would help them rob Steven. Defendant encouraged her to help. Carter told Danisha and Kayla the plan, which included that Danisha would distract Steven and that Carter would then push Danisha out of the way to rob Steven.