Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
24 California opinions name it 1 courts 2020–2025 19 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by California courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
People v. Gentilered2 sentences2022(Stats. 2018, ch. 5 1015, § 3.) It also amended section 188 to add subdivision (a)(3), which “eliminates natural and probable consequences liability for first and second degree murder.” (People v. Gentile (2020) 10 Cal.5th 830, 849 .) Section 1170.95, added by S.B. 1437, gives retroactive effect to the changes in sections 188 and 189. 2022(Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 3.) It also amended section 188 to add subdivision (a)(3), which “eliminates natural and probable consequences liability for first and second degree murder.” (People v. Gentile (2020) 10 Cal.5th 830, 849 .) Section 1170.95, added by S.B. 1437, gives retroactive effect to the changes in sections 188 and 189. | 2 | 9 |
People v. Lewisgreen2 sentences2025(Lewis, supra, 11 Cal.5th at p. 971.) We review the trial court’s inquiry de novo. 2023(People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 957 .) On May 9, 2022, Goodwin filed a one-page section 1172.6 petition, alleging he was convicted of murder following a trial, a crime for which he could not presently be convicted because of changes in sections 188 and 189, effective January 1, 2019. | 2 | 4 |
People v. Leegreen2 sentences2020Malice shall not be imputed to a person based solely on his or her participation in a crime.” (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 2.) The amendment of section 188 “eliminated liability for murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine.” (Lee, supra, 49 Cal.App.5th at p. 262.) The Legislature declared, “A person’s culpability for murder must be premised upon that person’s own actions and subjective mens rea.” (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 1, subd. (g).) Section 1170.95, added by S.B. 1437, gives retroactive effect to the changes in sections 188 and 189. 2020Malice shall not be imputed to a person based solely on his or her participation in a crime.” (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 2.) The amendment of section 188 “eliminated liability for murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine.” (Lee, supra, 49 Cal.App.5th at p. 262.) The Legislature declared, “A person’s culpability for murder must be premised upon that person’s own actions and subjective mens rea.” (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 1, subd. (g).) Section 1170.95, added by S.B. 1437, gives retroactive effect to the changes in sections 188 and 189. | 2 | 2 |
People v. Coleygreen2 sentences2024The third and final prong of the prima facie case requires that Ramos “could not presently be convicted of . . . attempted murder because of changes to section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1172.6 (a)(3).) Although attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine no longer exists due to recent changes in sections 188 and 189, “[d]irect aiding and abetting remains a valid theory of attempted murder . . . .” (People v. Coley (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 539 , 548.) As we explain, because Ramos admitted he “aided/abetted, with the specific intent to kill, the attemp 2024The third and final prong of the prima facie case requires that Ramos “could not presently be convicted of . . . attempted murder because of changes to section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1172.6 (a)(3).) Although attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine no longer exists due to recent changes in sections 188 and 189, “[d]irect aiding and abetting remains a valid theory of attempted murder . . . .” (People v. Coley (2022) 77 Cal.App.5th 539 , 548.) As we explain, because Ramos admitted he “aided/abetted, with the specific intent to kill, the attemp | 1 | 3 |
People v. Fortmangreen2 sentences2021(People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 722 ; see People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 959-960 (Lewis).) A person is entitled to relief under section 1170.95 if he or she was convicted of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences theory but could not now “be convicted of first or second degree murder because of changes to Section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1170.95, subd. (a).) “With one narrow exception [involving peace officer victims], Senate Bill [No.] 1437 effectively eliminates murder convictions premised on any theory of vicarious li 2021(People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 722 .) A person is entitled to relief under section 1170.95 if he was convicted of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences theory but could not now “be convicted of first or second degree murder because of changes to Section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1170.95, subd. (a).) “With one narrow exception [involving peace officer victims], Senate Bill 1437 effectively eliminates murder convictions premised on any theory of vicarious liability—that is, any theory by which a person can be convicted of murder | 1 | 2 |
People v. Wilsongreen2 sentences2025(Ibid.) The court must then hold an evidentiary hearing, at which the prosecution has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the petitioner is guilty of murder or attempted murder under current law. (§ 1172.6, subds. (d)(1) & (3); Wilson, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 869.) We review the trial court’s factual findings for substantial evidence. 2025(Ibid.; People v. Lovejoy (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 860 , 865.) A petition seeking resentencing under section 1172.6 must demonstrate, among other things, that the petitioner could not presently be convicted of murder or attempted murder due to the changes in sections 188 and 189. (§ 1172.6, subd. (a); People v. Wilson (2023) 14 Cal.5th 839 , 869 (Wilson).) Upon receipt of a facially compliant petition, the trial court must “determine whether the petitioner has made a prima facie case for relief.” (§ 1172.6, subd. (c).) If the petitioner has made such a case, the court must issue an order to show | 1 | 1 |
People v. Ramosgreen1 sentence2024(People v. Ramos (2024) 103 Cal.App.5th 460 , 465 [“Although attempted murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine no longer exists due to recent changes in sections 188 and 189, ‘[d]irect aiding and abetting remains a valid theory of attempted murder ....’ ”], quoting Coley, supra, 77 Cal.App.5th at p. 548.) Because the jury was never instructed it could find Mason guilty of attempted murder under the now-invalid natural and probable consequences doctrine, the record conclusively shows the jury relied on a still-valid theory of liability and, therefore, he could be convicted o | 1 | 1 |
People v. Cortesgreen1 sentence2024(Coley, supra, 77 Cal.App.5th at p. 548 [summary denial of petition to resentence attempted murder conviction is proper because jury was not instructed on natural and probable consequences doctrine]; People v. Cortes (2022) 75 Cal.App.5th 198 , 205 [“the jury was not instructed on any theory of liability for murder or attempted murder that required that malice be imputed to [petitioner]. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Offleygreen1 sentence2020(See People v. Offley (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 588 , 594 (Offley) [“The effect of the new law was to 8 eliminate liability for murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine”].) Section 1170.95, added by S.B. 1437, gives retroactive effect to the changes in sections 188 and 189. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in California. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
People v. Martinez
green
2 sentences2021(People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 722 ; see People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 959-960 (Lewis).) A person is entitled to relief under section 1170.95 if he or she was convicted of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences theory but could not now “be convicted of first or second degree murder because of changes to Section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1170.95, subd. (a).) “With one narrow exception [involving peace officer victims], Senate Bill [No.] 1437 effectively eliminates murder convictions premised on any theory of vicarious li 2021(People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 722 .) As relevant here, a person is entitled to relief under section 1170.95 if he was convicted of murder under the natural and probable consequences theory and all of the following conditions apply: (1) “[a] complaint, information, or indictment was filed against [him] that allowed the prosecution to proceed under a theory of . . . murder under the natural and probable consequences doctrine,” (2) he “was convicted of first degree or second degree murder following a trial,” and (3) he “could not be convicted of first or second degree murder beca | 4 | 2020–2021 |
People v. Cooper
green
2 sentences2024“A person aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she, (i) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, (ii) and with the intent or purpose of committing, facilitating or encouraging commission of the crime, (iii) by act or advice, aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime.” (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1164 , citing People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 561 .) “‘[U]nder direct aiding and abetting principles, an accomplice is guilty of an offense perpetrated by another [e.g., murder] if the accomplice aids the commission of that 2024“A person aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she, (i) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, (ii) and with the intent or purpose of committing, facilitating or encouraging commission of the crime, (iii) by act or advice, aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime.” (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1164 , citing People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 561 .) “‘[U]nder direct aiding and abetting principles, an accomplice is guilty of an offense perpetrated by another [e.g., murder] if the accomplice aids the commission of that | 2 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Beeman
green
2 sentences2024“A person aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she, (i) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, (ii) and with the intent or purpose of committing, facilitating or encouraging commission of the crime, (iii) by act or advice, aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime.” (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1164 , citing People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 561 .) “‘[U]nder direct aiding and abetting principles, an accomplice is guilty of an offense perpetrated by another [e.g., murder] if the accomplice aids the commission of that 2024“A person aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she, (i) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, (ii) and with the intent or purpose of committing, facilitating or encouraging commission of the crime, (iii) by act or advice, aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime.” (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1164 , citing People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 561 .) “‘[U]nder direct aiding and abetting principles, an accomplice is guilty of an offense perpetrated by another [e.g., murder] if the accomplice aids the commission of that | 2 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Curiel
green
2 sentences2024“A person aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she, (i) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, (ii) and with the intent or purpose of committing, facilitating or encouraging commission of the crime, (iii) by act or advice, aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime.” (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1164 , citing People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 561 .) “‘[U]nder direct aiding and abetting principles, an accomplice is guilty of an offense perpetrated by another [e.g., murder] if the accomplice aids the commission of that 2024“A person aids and abets the commission of a crime when he or she, (i) with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the perpetrator, (ii) and with the intent or purpose of committing, facilitating or encouraging commission of the crime, (iii) by act or advice, aids, promotes, encourages or instigates the commission of the crime.” (People v. Cooper (1991) 53 Cal.3d 1158, 1164 , citing People v. Beeman (1984) 35 Cal.3d 547, 561 .) “‘[U]nder direct aiding and abetting principles, an accomplice is guilty of an offense perpetrated by another [e.g., murder] if the accomplice aids the commission of that | 2 | 2024–2024 |
People v. Lovejoy
green
1 sentence2025(Ibid.; People v. Lovejoy (2024) 101 Cal.App.5th 860 , 865.) A petition seeking resentencing under section 1172.6 must demonstrate, among other things, that the petitioner could not presently be convicted of murder or attempted murder due to the changes in sections 188 and 189. (§ 1172.6, subd. (a); People v. Wilson (2023) 14 Cal.5th 839 , 869 (Wilson).) Upon receipt of a facially compliant petition, the trial court must “determine whether the petitioner has made a prima facie case for relief.” (§ 1172.6, subd. (c).) If the petitioner has made such a case, the court must issue an order to show | 1 | 2025–2025 |
People v. Banks
green
1 sentence2022That opinion held that a defendant challenging the sufficiency of a jury’s special circumstance finding may do so only by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus rather than raising the challenge in a petition filed pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95. 1 We reasoned that such a defendant is not relying on changes in sections 188 and 189 brought about by Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.); instead such a defendant is relying on changes created by People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788 and People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
People v. Clark
green
1 sentence2022That opinion held that a defendant challenging the sufficiency of a jury’s special circumstance finding may do so only by filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus rather than raising the challenge in a petition filed pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.95. 1 We reasoned that such a defendant is not relying on changes in sections 188 and 189 brought about by Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017-2018 Reg. Sess.); instead such a defendant is relying on changes created by People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788 and People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Tison v. Arizona
green
1 sentence2021(People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 722 .) A person is entitled to relief under section 1170.95 if he was convicted of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences theory but could not now “be convicted of first or second degree murder because of changes to Section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1170.95, subd. (a).) “With one narrow exception [involving peace officer victims], Senate Bill 1437 effectively eliminates murder convictions premised on any theory of vicarious liability—that is, any theory by which a person can be convicted of murder | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Enmund v. Florida
green
1 sentence2021(People v. Martinez (2019) 31 Cal.App.5th 719, 722 .) A person is entitled to relief under section 1170.95 if he was convicted of felony murder or murder under the natural and probable consequences theory but could not now “be convicted of first or second degree murder because of changes to Section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.” (§ 1170.95, subd. (a).) “With one narrow exception [involving peace officer victims], Senate Bill 1437 effectively eliminates murder convictions premised on any theory of vicarious liability—that is, any theory by which a person can be convicted of murder | 1 | 2021–2021 |
People v. Larios
green
1 sentence2020(People v. Larios (2019) 42 Cal.App.5th 956 , 967-968, review granted Feb. 26, 2020, No. S259983 [changes in section 188 necessarily apply to attempted murder], disapproving People v. Lopez (2019) 38 Cal.App.5th 1087 , review granted Nov. 13, 2019, No. S258175.) Even if Prado’s convictions were not final, he would not be entitled to relief under section 1170.95. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.