Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

People v. Lamoureux

California Court of Appeals, Fourth District, First Division

November 19, 2019

The PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
Patty Ann LAMOUREUX, Defendant and Appellant.

         [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 Marsy’s 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 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.