From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

People v. Gayton

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Mar 16, 2020
2d Crim. No. B299786 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2020)

Opinion

2d Crim. No. B299786

03-16-2020

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. IRVING GAYTON, Defendant and Appellant.

Stephen M. Hinkle, 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115. (Super. Ct. No. NA069732)
(Los Angeles County)

Irving Gayton appeals from the trial court's postjudgment order denying his petition to vacate his murder conviction and recall his sentence. (Pen. Code, §§ 1170.95, subd. (a), 1237, subd. (b).)

Unlabeled statutory references are to the Penal Code. --------

In March 2006, Gayton confronted three men in a liquor store parking lot. After speaking with Gayton, the three men walked to a nearby apartment complex. Gayton and his codefendant joined them a few minutes later. At the complex, Gayton told one of the three men that he intended to kill one of the other two. Gayton's codefendant fatally shot the man later that day. (People v. Gayton (Oct. 27, 2008, B199709) [nonpub. opn.].)

A jury convicted Gayton of first degree murder as an aider and abettor (§ 187, subd. (a), former § 189), and found true an allegation that a principal was armed with a firearm during the commission of the murder (§ 12022, subd. (a)(1)). The trial court sentenced him to 26 years to life in state prison.

In February 2019, Gayton petitioned the trial court to vacate his murder conviction and recall his sentence. The court summarily denied the petition on alternative grounds, including Gayton's ineligibility for relief because Gayton was not convicted of murder on a natural and probable consequences theory or pursuant to the felony-murder doctrine. (Cf. People v. Cornelius (2020) 44 Cal.App.5th 54, 58 [summary denial proper where petitioner "indisputably ineligible" for section 1170.95 relief].)

We appointed counsel to represent Gayton in this appeal. After counsel examined the record, he filed an opening brief that raises no arguable issues. On January 29, 2020, we advised Gayton by mail that he had 30 days within which to submit any contentions or issues he wished us to consider. We have not received a response.

We have reviewed the entire record and are satisfied that Gayton's attorney fully complied with his responsibilities and that no arguable issue exists. (People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 441.)

The trial court's order denying Gayton's petition to vacate his murder conviction and recall his sentence, issued April 23, 2019, is affirmed.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

TANGEMAN, J. We concur:

GILBERT, P. J.

YEGAN, J.

Richard M. Goul, Judge


Superior Court County of Los Angeles

Stephen M. Hinkle, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.


Summaries of

People v. Gayton

COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Mar 16, 2020
2d Crim. No. B299786 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2020)
Case details for

People v. Gayton

Case Details

Full title:THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. IRVING GAYTON, Defendant and…

Court:COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX

Date published: Mar 16, 2020

Citations

2d Crim. No. B299786 (Cal. Ct. App. Mar. 16, 2020)