People v. Duke
Decision Date | 28 September 2020 |
Docket Number | B300430 |
Citation | 269 Cal.Rptr.3d 264,55 Cal.App.5th 113 |
Parties | The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Jonathan Daveilo DUKE, Defendant and Appellant. |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Spolin Law, Aaron Spolin, Los Angeles, and Caitlin Dukes for Defendant and Appellant.
Xavier Becerra, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Idan Ivri and Nancy Lii Ladner, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
Defendant and appellant Jonathan Daveilo Duke challenges the trial court's denial of his petition under Penal Code 1 section 1170.95 for resentencing on his murder conviction. A jury convicted Duke of murder in 2013 for his involvement in an incident in which a cohort stabbed the victim, Victor Enriquez, to death. The trial court denied the petition after finding beyond a reasonable doubt that Duke could still be convicted of murder and was thus ineligible for resentencing under section 1170.95. Duke contends that the trial court erred by treating the case as if it involved felony murder, when it instead involves the application of the natural and probable consequences doctrine. We agree that the case does not involve felony murder, but we nevertheless affirm because the court correctly concluded that Duke could still be convicted of murder under the law as amended.
In a prior opinion in Duke's direct appeal ( People v. Duke (Jan. 17, 2017, B264579), 2017 WL 379231 [nonpub. opn.] ( Duke I )), we described the facts of the case as follows:
A jury convicted Duke of first degree murder (§ 187) and found true an allegation that Duke committed the offense for the benefit of a criminal street gang (§...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Ramirez
...v. Clements (2021) 60 Cal.App.5th 597, 603, 274 Cal.Rptr.3d 821, review granted Apr. 28, 2021, S267624; but see People v. Duke (2020) 55 Cal.App.5th 113, 123, 269 Cal.Rptr.3d 264, review granted Jan. 13, 2021, S265309.) "We review the trial court's fact finding for substantial evidence." ( ......
-
People v. Harris
...v. Lopez (2020) 56 Cal.App.5th 936, 949, 271 Cal.Rptr.3d 170, review granted Feb. 10, 2021, S265974; but see People v. Duke (2020) 55 Cal.App.5th 113, 123, 269 Cal.Rptr.3d 264, review granted Jan. 13, 2021, S265309 [prosecutor must only prove a reasonable jury could find the defendant guilt......
-
People v. Rivera
...under a still-valid theory or whether it requires proof of every element of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. (People v. Duke (2020) 55 Cal.App.5th 113, 269 Cal.Rptr.3d 264, review granted Jan. 13, 2021, S265309.)9 The Attorney General's brief cites Drayton but not Garcia , which was dec......
-
People v. Dehuff
...; Stats.1998, c. 472 (A.B.2066); Cal. Const., Art. IV, § 8.)"7 The People state that this court authored People v. Duke (2020) 55 Cal.App.5th 113, 269 Cal.Rptr.3d 264 (Duke ), a case upon which Garcia heavily relied for its reasoning. In fact, Duke was authored by Division One of the Second......
-
Appendix E
...2021, S266652; People v. Lopez (2020) 56 Cal.App.5th 936, 949, review granted Feb. 10, 2021, S265974; but see People v. Duke (2020) 55 Cal. App.5th 113, 123, review granted Jan. 13, 2021, S265309.) The prosecutor and petitioner may rely on the record of conviction or offer new or additional......