People v. Vizcarra
Decision Date | 19 October 2022 |
Docket Number | D078869 |
Citation | 84 Cal.App.5th 377,300 Cal.Rptr.3d 371 |
Parties | The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Gerardo Jimenez VIZCARRA, Defendant and Appellant. |
Court | California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
Ronda G. Norris, San Diego, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Assistant Attorney General, A. Natasha Cortina, Lynne G. McGinnis, and Alan L. Amann, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
In 2001, Gerardo Vizcarra was convicted of the second degree murder of Richard Holcomb ( Pen. Code, § 187, subd. (a) ).1 Vizcarra and three confederates beat, kicked, and stabbed Holcomb to death after he bumped a mutual companion's young child into a wall while playing with him.
In 2019, Vizcarra filed a petition to vacate his murder conviction and to be resentenced under section 1172.6 based on changes to our state's murder laws effectuated by Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) (hereafter, Senate Bill 1437) and Senate Bill No. 775 (2020–2021 Reg. Sess.) (hereafter, Senate Bill 775).2 The trial court denied the petition for resentencing, finding Vizcarra was not entitled to relief because he remained liable for Holcomb's murder under a still-valid theory of liability—to wit, he directly aided and abetted an implied malice murder.
Vizcarra appeals the order denying his petition for resentencing. He argues direct aiding and abetting of implied malice murder is not a legally-valid theory of murder liability. Further, he argues he is entitled to resentencing under Senate Bill No. 1393 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) (hereafter, Senate Bill 1393), which grants courts discretion to strike or dismiss prior serious felony enhancements in furtherance of justice.
We reject these arguments and affirm the order denying Vizcarra's petition for resentencing.
The following background comes from this court's opinion in People v. Vizcarra (Oct. 26, 2004, D041824) [nonpub. opn.] (hereafter, Vizcarra I ).
. Seven of Holcomb's ribs had been fractured in a ‘roughly linear pattern, indicating some broad-surface type impact’ such as a two-by-four or flat portion of a chair or table. The injuries were inflicted while Holcomb was still alive. At the time of his death, Holcomb had a blood alcohol level of .22 and had methamphetamine in his system.
(Vizcarra I, supra , D041824, footnotes omitted.)
The district attorney charged Vizcarra with Holcomb's murder and arson of an inhabited structure ( § 451, subd. (d) ). It advanced alternative theories of murder liability, arguing: (1) he was liable for murder as a direct aider and abettor; and (2) he was liable for murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine because he aided and abetted the commission of a target crime (assault by a deadly weapon or by means of force likely to produce great bodily injury) and murder was the natural and probable consequence of the target crime.3 Vizcarra was not prosecuted for murder under a felony-murder theory of liability.
After a trial, a jury acquitted Vizcarra of first degree murder, but found him guilty of second degree murder and arson of an inhabited...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
People v. Bartholomew
... ... Powell ... ( 2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 689, 713 ( Powell ), many ... courts have rejected this same argument. (See People v ... Glukhoy (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 576, 599-600 ... ( Glukhoy ); People v. Schell (2022) 84 ... Cal.App.5th 437, 442; People v. Vizcarra (2022) 84 ... Cal.App.5th 377, 388-392.) Defendant contends Powell ... was wrongly decided and is inconsistent with ... Gentile , supra , 10 Cal.5th 830. As set ... forth below, we disagree ... Powell ... held that aiding and abetting a ... ...
-
The People v. Lopez
... ... [and] probable consequences doctrine are permitted the same ... relief as those persons convicted of murder under the same ... theories.'" ( People v. Birdsall (2022) 77 ... Cal.App.5th 859, 865, fn. 18; People v. Vizcarra ... (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 377, 388.) On June 30, 2022, the ... statute was renumbered as section 1172.6 without further ... substantive changes. ( People v. Saibu , ... supra , 81 Cal.App.5th at p. 715, fn. 3.) ... Also, ... as relevant to the ... ...
-
People v. Garnica
...persons convicted of murder under the same theories.'" (People v. Birdsall (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 859, 865, fn. 18; People v. Vizcarra (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 377, 388.) On 30, 2022, the statute was renumbered as section 1172.6 without further substantive changes. (People v. Saibu, supra, 81 C......
-
People v. Bravo
... ... remains a valid theory of liability for implied malice second ... degree murder. ( People v. Werntz (2023) 90 ... Cal.App.5th 1093, 1111-1113; People v. Silva (2023) ... 87 Cal.App.5th 632, 639-640; People v. Vizcarra ... (2022) 84 Cal.App.5th 377, 388-392; People v ... Glukhoy (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 576, 589-591; People ... v. Cortes (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 198, 205; People v ... Langi (2022) 73 Cal.App.5th 972, 983; People v ... Superior Court ( Valenzuela ) (2021) 73 ... ...