People v. Jimenez CA2/8

DISCUSSION

Defendant contends the trial court erred in denying his petition for resentencing and that a remand for further proceedings is warranted. Defendant says the relief afforded by Penal Code section 1172.6 to defendants convicted of attempted murder is not limited to convictions based on the natural and probable consequences doctrine. He says the statutory language should not be construed so narrowly because the legislative history shows that convictions for attempted murder based on a theory of imputed

3 malice were also intended to be included within the statute’s purview. Defendant further argues the jury instructions permitted the jury to convict him on a theory of imputed malice based solely on his participation in the crime. He contends the record of conviction therefore does not show conclusively he is ineligible as a matter of law and denial at the prima facie stage was improper. “We review de novo a trial court’s prima facie determination that a petitioner is ineligible for [Penal Code] section 1172.6 relief as a matter of law.” (People v. Allen (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 389, 395 (Allen); accord, People v. Ervin (2021) 72 Cal.App.5th 90, 101.) We reject defendant’s…