People v. Padilla CA2/6

DISCUSSION

Padilla contends the trial court erred in finding her ineligible for section 1172.6 relief because the record of conviction does not show she personally harbored the requisite intent to commit murder. We are not persuaded. Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) “ ‘amend[ed] the felony murder rule and the natural and probable consequences doctrine, as it relates to murder, to ensure that

3 murder liability is not imposed on a person who is not the actual killer, did not act with the intent to kill, or was not a major participant in the underlying felony who acted with reckless indifference to human life.’ (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § l, subd. (f).)” (People v. Gentile (2020) 10 Cal.5th 830, 842, superseded on other grounds in People v. Oyler (2025) 17 Cal.5th 756, 836.) Senate Bill No. 1437 allowed those convicted under the former law to petition to vacate their conviction and seek resentencing under the revised murder laws. (§ 1172.6; People v. Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th 698, 708 (Strong).) To be eligible for relief, the petitioner must make a prima facie showing that they could not be presently convicted of murder under the changes to section 188 or 189. (§ 1172.6,…