People v. Tran CA4/1

DISCUSSION

As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to Delgadillo, and Tran has elected to file his own supplemental brief. Although we are “required to evaluate the specific arguments presented in that brief,” we are not “compel[led to conduct] an independent review of the entire record to identify unraised issues.” (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.) Tran first argues that there was instructional error with respect to the attempted murder charges, and the jury was not properly instructed as to the requisite mens rea. As we have repeatedly held, such alleged “instructional errors . . . have nothing to do with the[ ] 2019 legislative changes” to the law of attempted murder. (People v. Berry-Vierwinden (2023) 97 Cal.App.5th 921, 935; see also People v. Flores (2023) 96 Cal.App.5th 1164, 1173; People v. Burns (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 862, 867 (Burns).) At the time of this defendant’s trial in 2014, it was well established that “when the charged offense and the intended offense—murder or attempted murder—are the same, . . . the aider and abettor must know and share the murderous intent of the actual perpetrator.” (People v. McCoy (2001) 25 Cal.4th 1111,…