People v. Bellows CA2/2
B306995
| Cal. Ct. App. | Sep 22, 2021Background
- In 2014 a jury convicted Patricia Bellows of two counts of attempted murder and one count of shooting at an inhabited dwelling; jury found the attempted murders willful, deliberate, and premeditated and found a principal personally discharged a firearm and gang enhancements. She admitted Three Strikes priors and received an aggregate term of 85 years to life.
- Trial evidence: Bellows drove two male gang members to the site of a party after prior altercations; one male approached the house and fired multiple rounds; officers pursued and arrested the vehicle occupants.
- On direct appeal (Bellows I) this court rejected Bellows’s sufficiency argument, holding the evidence supported conviction as a direct aider and abettor who knew and shared the shooter’s intent to kill; no natural-and-probable-consequences instructions were given.
- In February 2020 Bellows petitioned for resentencing under Penal Code § 1170.95, asserting she had been convicted under the natural-and-probable-consequences theory and thus became ineligible after SB 1437 and related statutory revisions.
- The trial court summarily denied the § 1170.95 petition, concluding (1) § 1170.95 does not provide a procedure to vacate attempted murder convictions and (2) Bellows was convicted as a direct aider with intent to kill and thus would remain culpable after the statutory changes. Bellows timely appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 1170.95 applies to attempted murder convictions | People: § 1170.95 does not provide a procedure to vacate attempted murder convictions | Bellows: SB 1437 abrogated natural-and-probable-consequences liability for attempted murder; § 1170.95 should apply | Court: § 1170.95 does not provide relief for attempted murder; even if it did, Bellows is ineligible |
| Whether Bellows was convicted under natural-and-probable-consequences or as a direct aider who shared intent to kill | People: Record shows conviction as a direct aider/abetter who knew and shared intent to kill (no NPC instruction) | Bellows: Evidence insufficient for shared intent; therefore conviction must have rested on NPC theory | Court: Appellate record confirms direct aiding with shared intent; prior sufficiency ruling forecloses relitigation; Bellows remains ineligible for § 1170.95 relief |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Medrano, 42 Cal.App.5th 1001 (discusses SB 1437’s impact on attempted murder liability)
- People v. Love, 55 Cal.App.5th 273 (holds § 1170.95 does not apply to attempted murder)
- People v. Alaybue, 51 Cal.App.5th 207 (reaches similar conclusion on § 1170.95 and attempted murder)
- People v. Munoz, 39 Cal.App.5th 738 (addresses limits of § 1170.95 relief)
- People v. Lopez, 38 Cal.App.5th 1087 (raises question whether SB 1437 applies to attempted murder; review granted)
- People v. Nguyen, 53 Cal.App.5th 1154 (explains ineligibility when convicted as a direct aider with intent to kill)
- People v. Allison, 55 Cal.App.5th 449 ( § 1170.95 is not a vehicle to relitigate resolved factual findings)
- People v. Lee, 31 Cal.4th 613 (pre-SB 1437 law: direct aider with intent to kill guilty of attempted murder)
- People v. Favor, 54 Cal.4th 868 (discussed in relation to NPC doctrine and aider liability)
- Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99 (addressed in relation to jury factfinding issues)
- People v. Chiu, 59 Cal.4th 155 (cited in consideration of jury-findings and sentencing issues)