Renteria

People v. Renteria

Bad Law
13 Cal. 5th 951·297 Cal. Rptr. 3d 344·515 P.3d 77
Supreme Court of CaliforniaAugust 25, 2022S266854California7,856 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kruger, J.

Opinion of the Court by Kruger, J.

Late one August night, Cristian Renteria walked through a neighborhood in Tulare and fired a gun at a house. Then, after a dog barked next door, Renteria fired the gun at that house, too. For this episode — which fortunately did not result in any injuries — a jury convicted Renteria of two counts of shooting at an inhabited dwelling. (Pen. Code, § 246.) That offense is ordinarily punishable by no more than seven years of imprisonment. (Ibid.) But the prosecution alleged that Renteria was subject to indeterminate life terms for the shootings because he committed the crimes “for the benefit of . . . any criminal street gang, with the specific intent to promote, further, or assist in any criminal conduct by gang members.” (Id., former § 186.22, subdivision (b)(4).) While Renteria was a gang member, there was no evidence he was accompanied by any other gang members at the time of the shooting. The jury nonetheless found the gang allegation true, and Renteria was sentenced to two indeterminate terms of life imprisonment. Renteria challenged the gang penalties as unsupported by the evidence, but the Court of Appeal affirmed, relying on an…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.