People v. Geronimo CA2/8

California Court of Appeal May 30, 2024 No. B330022Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that the defendant was ineligible for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6 because he was convicted under a theory of direct aiding and abetting, and the jury was not instructed on any theory of imputed malice.

Issues

Whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant's petition for resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6 for failure to make a prima facie case.

Disposition. Affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“Because Geronimo was convicted under a theory of direct aiding and abetting, he is ineligible for relief under resentencing relief.”

“The instructions make clear that Geronimo himself had to have the intent to kill.”

“As confirmed by our review of the record of conviction, the jury was not instructed on the natural and probable consequences doctrine or any other theory of imputed malice.”

Filed 5/30/24 P. v. Geronimo CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B330022

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA443976-01) v.

ABRAHAM GERONIMO,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Eleanor J. Hunter, Judge. Affirmed.

Neil Rosenbaum, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

——————————

Pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), we review this appeal of an order denying defendant’s petition for resentencing brought under Penal Code1 section 1172.6. We affirm. BACKGROUND On August 23, 2016, the People charged defendant Abraham Geronimo by amended information with one count of attempted willful, deliberate, and premeditated murder in violation of sections 664 and 187, subdivision (a) and one count of assault with a firearm in violation of section 245, subdivision (a)(2). As to the attempted murder count, it was alleged that a principal personally and intentionally used and discharged a firearm causing great bodily injury pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivisions (b), (c), (d) and (e)(1). It was also alleged both offenses were committed for the benefit of a criminal street gang. (§ 186.22(b)(1)(C).) A jury found Geronimo guilty of both charges and found the enhancement allegations true. The trial court sentenced Geronimo to 25 years to life with the possibility of parole. For context only, we recite the facts of the case from our opinion affirming Geronimo’s conviction. Geronimo and Julio R. were spraying paint over rival gang graffiti on a garage door near the victim’s house. The victim went outside to move his car and Julio told him, “Don’t mess with me.” (People v. Geronimo (Dec. 12, 2017, B277467) [nonpub. opn.].) Geronimo seemed to be acting as a “lookout,” i.e., “looking” and “keeping an eye out.” Before the shooting, Geronimo crossed the street and stayed in the area. Julio R. fired a handgun at the victim three times and

People v. Geronimo CA2/8

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

THE PEOPLE, B330022

ABRAHAM GERONIMO,

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

STRATTON, P. J.

GRIMES, J. VIRAMONTES, J.

AI Brief