People v. Guerrero CA4/2
E078570
| Cal. Ct. App. | May 3, 2022Background
- In 2005 Edwardo Guerrero shot and killed Richard Gutierrez; Juan Antonio Guerrero (defendant) drove the getaway car and was convicted in 2006 of first-degree murder as a direct aider and abettor and sentenced to 25 years to life.
- Defendant consistently argued he was not the shooter and alternatively was only an accessory after the fact or mistakenly identified; the jury was instructed on aiding and abetting, not on felony murder or the natural and probable consequences doctrine.
- Defendant filed a §1170.95 petition in 2019 after SB1437; the superior court summarily denied it and this court affirmed because the record showed conviction as a direct aider and abettor, not under felony‑murder or natural‑and‑probable‑consequences theories.
- Defendant later filed new petitions invoking Senate Bill No. 775 (amending §1170.95 to clarify relief scope), arguing SB775 makes direct aiders eligible; the superior court again denied and this court affirmed.
- The appellate court held the record of conviction refuted eligibility because direct aiding and abetting requires the same mens rea as the actual killer, so SB775 does not make someone convicted as a direct aider eligible for §1170.95 relief.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether SB775/Amendments to §1170.95 make direct aiders and abettors eligible for relief | SB775 does not expand relief to direct aider/abettor; defendant was convicted as a direct aider and thus ineligible | SB775 allows relief for any person whose malice was imputed solely from participation, including direct aiding and abetting | Court held SB775 does not render direct aiders eligible; defendant was convicted as a direct aider so ineligible |
| Whether the petition could be summarily denied at the prima facie stage based on the record of conviction | The court may deny at prima facie stage if the record conclusively shows ineligibility as a matter of law | Defendant contended prior denial should be reconsidered under SB775 | Court held summary denial was proper because the record (jury instructions and opinion) showed direct aiding and abetting, refuting petitioner’s allegations |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. Lewis, 11 Cal.5th 952 (clarifies prima facie inquiry and standard under §1170.95)
- People v. Cortes, 75 Cal.App.5th 198 (explains SB775 clarifies relief for attempted murder and manslaughter under felony‑murder/natural probable consequences)
- People v. Offley, 48 Cal.App.5th 588 (holds direct aiders and abettors who share murderous intent are not affected by SB1437)
- People v. Mejorado, 73 Cal.App.5th 562 (notes §1170.95 amendments codify Lewis holdings)
- People v. Wende, 25 Cal.3d 436 (authorizes appellate counsel’s brief when no arguable issues remain)
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (federal authority on appointed counsel’s duty to brief potential issues)