People v. Price CA2/4
B302565
Cal. Ct. App.Sep 1, 2021Background
- Andre Price was tried for the 2012 killing of Jeffrey Davis; a jury in 2014 acquitted him of first-degree murder but convicted him of second-degree murder and the court later sentenced him to 35 years to life.
- The prosecution's theory was that Price, with co-defendant Rodney Longmiyer and Andrea Fowler, planned a robbery during which Davis was assaulted and then shot; evidence included phone records, surveillance, injuries consistent with a struggle, and Price's DNA on the victim's knuckle.
- The jury found the firearm enhancement not true and acquitted Price of possession of a firearm by a felon; on direct appeal the conviction for second-degree murder was affirmed as supported by aiding-and-abetting evidence.
- In 2019 Price filed a petition under Penal Code §1170.95 (post-SB 1437 resentencing) claiming he was convicted under felony murder/natural-and-probable-consequences theories and thus might be eligible for relief under the amended murder statutes.
- The trial court (after appointing counsel and hearing argument) denied the petition, concluding Price was convicted as a direct aider and abettor (a theory preserved by SB 1437) rather than under felony murder, and thus was statutorily ineligible for §1170.95 relief.
- On appeal Price argued the jury could have relied on an impermissible felony-murder theory for second-degree murder; the Court of Appeal affirmed, finding the record and prior opinion show the conviction was for aiding and abetting and presuming the jury followed instructions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (People) | Defendant's Argument (Price) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the trial court erred in denying Price's §1170.95 petition because the jury might have convicted on a felony-murder theory | The record (including the appellate opinion) shows Price was convicted as an aider and abettor, not on felony murder, so he is ineligible for §1170.95 relief | Some jurors might have disregarded instructions and based the second-degree murder verdict on felony murder (or an improper theory), which would make Price eligible for relief under SB 1437 | Affirmed: court correctly denied §1170.95 relief — conviction was necessarily under an aiding-and-abetting malice theory preserved by SB 1437; speculation jury ignored instructions is insufficient to show eligibility |
Key Cases Cited
- People v. McCoy, 25 Cal.4th 1111 (a direct aider-and-abettor is liable for murder because he shares the killer's malice)
- People v. Gentile, 10 Cal.5th 830 (SB 1437 does not eliminate direct aiding-and-abetting liability for murder)
- People v. Lamoureux, 42 Cal.App.5th 241 (discussion of SB 1437 restricting felony-murder and natural-and-probable-consequences doctrines)
- People v. Offley, 48 Cal.App.5th 588 (direct aider remains liable for murder under the revised law)
- People v. Prince, 40 Cal.4th 1179 (presumption that juries follow court instructions)