People v. Wilson CA4/1

DISCUSSION

Prior to the enactment of Senate Bill 775, courts were divided over the question of whether a person convicted of attempted murder was eligible for resentencing under Senate Bill 1437 and section 1170.95. (People v. Alaybue (2020) 51 Cal.App.5th 207, 222.) Senate Bill 775 addresses this conflict. The Legislature’s stated purpose, in part, in enacting Senate Bill 775 was to clarify that “persons who were convicted of attempted murder or manslaughter under a theory of felony murder and the natural probable

1 Statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise specified. 2 consequences doctrine are permitted the same relief as those persons convicted of murder under the same theories.” (Stats. 2021, ch. 551, § 1.) In their supplemental briefs, the parties recognize the purpose of Senate Bill 775 as it applies to this case. We agree with the parties on the effect of the new legislation. We accept the Attorney General’s concession. The right to appointment of counsel under section 1170.95 arose when Wilson filed a facially sufficient petition. (§ 1170.95, subd. (b)(3)); People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 960-972.) Additionally, the record before us includes…