California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division
[255
Cal.Rptr.3d 257] APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court
of Riverside County, John D. Molloy, Judge. Reversed. (Super.
Ct. No. SWF1101646)
Page 242
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 243
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 244
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 245
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 246
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 247
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 248
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 249
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 250
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 251
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 252
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 253
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 254
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 255
[Copyrighted Material Omitted]
Page 256
COUNSEL
Michelle
May Peterson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for
Defendant and Appellant.
Xavier
Becerra, Attorney General, Thomas S. Patterson, Assistant
Attorney General, Tamar Pachter and Nelson R. Richards,
Deputy Attorneys General, as Amicus Curiae on behalf of
Defendant and Appellant.
Michael
A. Hestrin, District Attorney, and Alan D. Tate, Deputy
District Attorney, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
OPINION
McCONNELL,
P.J.
I
INTRODUCTION
In
2018, the Legislature passed and the Governor signed into law
Senate Bill No. 1437 (Senate Bill 1437), legislation that
prospectively amended the mens rea requirements for the
offense of murder and restricted the circumstances under
which a person can be liable for murder under the
felony-murder rule or the natural and probable consequences
doctrine. (Stats. [255 Cal.Rptr.3d 258] 2018, ch. 1015.)
Senate Bill 1437 also established a procedure permitting
certain qualifying persons who were previously convicted of
felony murder or murder under the natural and probable
consequences doctrine to petition the courts that sentenced
them to vacate their murder convictions and obtain
resentencing on any remaining counts. (Id., § 3.)
Patty
Ann Lamoureux appeals an order denying her petition to vacate
a first degree murder conviction and obtain resentencing
under the procedures established by Senate Bill 1437. The
trial court denied the petition after concluding the
resentencing provision of Senate Bill 1437 invalidly amended
Proposition 7, a voter initiative that increased the
punishments for persons convicted of murder. (Prop. 7, as
approved by voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 7, 1978) (Proposition
7).) The People urge us to affirm the denial order on grounds
that: (1) Senate Bill 1437 invalidly amended Proposition 7;
(2) Senate Bill 1437 invalidly amended Proposition 115, a
voter initiative that augmented the list of predicate
offenses for first degree felony-murder liability (Prop. 115,
as approved by voters, Primary Elec. (June 5, 1990)
(Proposition 115)); (3) the resentencing provision violates
the separation of powers doctrine; and/or (4) the
resentencing provision deprives crime victims the rights
afforded them by the Victims Bill of Rights Act of 2008,
commonly known as Marsys Law (Prop. 9, as approved by
voters, Gen. Elec. (Nov. 4, 2008) (Proposition 9)).
In
People v. Superior Court (Gooden) (Nov. 19, 2019,
D075787) __ Cal.App.5th __, 255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239');">255 Cal.Rptr.3d 239, 2019 WL
6125908 (Gooden ), a companion case issued
concurrently herewith, we concluded Senate Bill 1437 did not
invalidly amend ...