People v. Villegas CA5

California Court of Appeal Jun 18, 2024 No. F086751Unpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A trial court errs by relying on police reports to deny a Penal Code section 1172.6 petition at the prima facie stage when the defendant only stipulated to those reports as a factual basis for a plea without admitting the truth of the facts contained therein.

Issues

Whether a trial court may rely on police reports to deny a section 1172.6 petition at the prima facie stage based on a stipulation to a factual basis for a plea.
Whether a stipulation to a factual basis for a plea constitutes a binding admission of the truth of facts within police reports for purposes of section 1172.6 eligibility.

Disposition. reversed and remanded

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“the court may only consider facts the defendant stipulated to as part of the factual basis or otherwise admitted as true.”

“absent an indication that a defendant admitted the truth of particular facts, the stipulation to a factual basis for the plea does not ‘constitute[] a binding admission for all purposes.’”

“The trial court would have necessarily had to engage in factfinding to reach a conclusion about whether appellant was eligible for relief.”

Filed 6/18/24 P. v. Villegas CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F086751 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. VCF218166) v.

FRED ISRAEL VILLEGAS, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Tulare County. Melinda Myrle Reed, Judge. Sylvia W. Beckham, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Michael P. Farrell, Assistant Attorney General, Eric L. Christoffersen, and Robert Gezi, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Poochigian, Acting P. J., Detjen, J. and Snauffer, J.

INTRODUCTION Fred Israel Villegas, appellant, appeals from the denial of a petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code1 section 1172.6.2 Appellant argues the trial court improperly relied on police reports when denying his petition at the prima facie stage. The People concede denying the petition was error. We reverse the July 20, 2023 order denying appellant’s section 1172.6 petition, and remand the matter directing the court to issue an order to show cause and conduct further proceedings as required by section 1172.6, subdivision (d). PROCEDURAL HISTORY On March 6, 2009, the Tulare County District Attorney filed a complaint charging appellant with first degree murder (§ 187). It was further alleged appellant personally used a deadly weapon, a knife, in the commission of the crime (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)), the murder was committed during the commission of a felony, burglary (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17)), and appellant was an active participant in a criminal street gang and carried out the murder for the benefit of a street gang (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(22)). Appellant, who was a minor at least 16 years of age at the time, was also charged as an adult (Welf. & Inst. Code, § 707, subd. (d)(1)). On June 9, 2010, appellant pled guilty to first degree murder and was sentenced to 25 years to life pursuant to an indicated sentence. The factual basis for the plea was marked as “[c]ounsel stipulate based on police report” in the minute order. Additionally, the sentencing court and counsel had the following exchange:

People v. Villegas CA5

AI Brief

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief