Opinion
B297448
03-02-2020
THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. SHAWN CARTER, Defendant and Appellant.
Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA252719) APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Curtis B. Rappe, Judge. Affirmed. Athena Shudde, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
____________________
In 2003, defendant and appellant Shawn R. Carter was released from prison after approximately seven years of incarceration, and returned to his wife's home. A day later, he became convinced that his wife was seeing other men and that she lied when she said she had given birth to his son. He beat and strangled her to death.
The facts are taken from our prior unpublished opinion in People v. Carter (Sept. 11, 2007, B194447) [nonpub. opn.]).
In 2006, the jury found Carter guilty of second degree murder. (Pen. Code, § 187.) Carter admitted that he had suffered a prior strike and a prior serious felony. (§§ 667, subd. (a), 667, subds. (b)-(i), 1170.12, subds. (a)-(d).) He was sentenced to 35 years to life in state prison.
All further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise indicated. --------
Carter timely appealed, and we affirmed the trial court's judgment.
On March 4, 2019, Carter petitioned for resentencing under section 1170.95 as enacted pursuant to Senate Bill No. 1437 (Sen. Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015)) (Senate Bill 1437), effective January 1, 2019.
Senate Bill 1437 created a procedure by which a person convicted of murder "who did not act with implied or express malice" may seek relief from liability if the person is "not the actual killer, did not act with the intent to kill, or was not a major participant in the underlying felony who acted with reckless indifference to human life." (People v. Munoz (2019) 39 Cal.App.5th 738, 749-750; Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 1, subds. (f), (g); People v. Anthony (2019) 32 Cal.App.5th 1102, 1147; People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 723 (Martinez).) Senate Bill 1437 also added section 1170.95, which permits persons convicted of murder under a felony murder or natural and probable consequences theory to petition in the sentencing court for an order vacating their convictions and allowing defendant to be resentenced. (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 4; Martinez, supra, 31 Cal.App.5th at p. 723.)
The trial court denied Carter's petition, finding: "It is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) petitioner was the direct perpetrator of second degree murder of his wife, (2) petitioner was not convicted under a theory of felony-murder of any degree, or (3) a theory of natural and probable consequences."
Carter appealed the trial court's order, and this court appointed counsel to represent him on appeal. After examining the record, Carter's attorney filed an opening brief raising no issues. On December 12, 2019, this court advised Carter that he had 30 days to personally submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. We received no response.
We have examined the entire record and are satisfied that Carter's attorney has fully complied with her responsibilities and that no arguable issues exist. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436.)
DISPOSITION
The trial court's order is affirmed.
MOOR, J.
We concur:
RUBIN, P. J.
KIM, J.