People v. Paniagua-Herrera CA2/5 ( 2024 )

Filed 5/31/24 P. v. Paniagua-Herrera CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
THE PEOPLE, B329900
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. PA040317)
v.
JUAN MARTIN PANIAGUA-
HERRERA,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los
Angeles County, David Walgren, Judge. Affirmed.
Patricia S. Lai, under appointment by the Court of Appeal
for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
___________________________
In 2005, following a court trial, the trial court found Juan
Martin Paniagua-Herrera guilty of second degree murder (Pen.
Code, § 187, subd. (a)(1)).1 He was sentenced to 15 years to life in
prison.
In 2022, Paniagua-Herrera filed a petition for resentencing
pursuant to former section 1170.95 (now section 1172.6). At the
hearing, defense counsel conceded that Paniagua-Herrera was
the only defendant charged. At trial, Paniagua-Herrera argued
diminished capacity and self-defense. The trial court denied the
petition because Paniagua-Herrera failed to show he was
convicted under an invalid theory of murder. He was not
prosecuted as an aider and abettor and there was no indication
that malice could have been imputed to him.
Paniagua-Herrera appealed, and this court appointed
counsel to represent him. After examining the record, Paniagua-
Herrera’s attorney filed an opening brief raising no issues and
asking that we follow the procedures set forth in People v.
Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo). Counsel also
requested that we conduct an independent review of the record.
We invited Paniagua-Herrera to submit a supplemental brief,
which he did.
We decline to conduct an independent review of the record
as counsel requested, and we limit our consideration to the
specific issues Paniagua-Herrera raises in his letter response
filed in this court.2 (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232
1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2 Paniagua-Herrera’s February 13, 2024 request that we
take judicial notice of the appellate record in Case No. B183673 is
denied.
2
[where a defendant’s attorney finds no arguable issues in an
appeal from the denial of a section 1172.6 petition and the
defendant files a supplemental brief, “the Court of Appeal is
required to evaluate the specific arguments presented in that
brief and to issue a written opinion,” but the question of whether
to conduct an independent review of the entire record is “wholly
within the court’s discretion”].)
Paniagua-Herrera submitted a two-page letter brief. None
of the arguments raised in Paniagua-Herrera’s supplemental
brief address his eligibility for resentencing under section 1172.6
or have any bearing on whether Paniagua-Herrera could
“presently be convicted of murder or attempted murder because
of changes to Section 188 or 189 made effective January 1, 2019.”
(§ 1172.6, subd. (a)(3).) Rather, he argues that: (1) the knife that
was recovered was inconsistent with a witness’s description of the
weapon; (2) the victim threatened a woman with a knife in a bar
earlier on the night of the murder; (3) a witness who would have
testified regarding prior incidents involving the victim did not
testify because her family was threatened; and (4) trial counsel
rendered ineffective assistance by failing to investigate and
interview two witnesses. Section 1172.6 provides no relief for
trial error. (See, e.g., People v. DeHuff (2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 428,
438 [section 1172.6 “does not permit a petitioner to establish
eligibility on the basis of alleged trial error”].) Accordingly, these
arguments provide no basis for reversal.
3
DISPOSITION
The trial court’s order denying Paniagua-Herrera’s Penal
Code section 1172.6 petition is affirmed.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.
MOOR, J.
WE CONCUR:
BAKER, Acting P. J.
LEE, J.
 Judge of the San Bernardino County Superior Court,
assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of
the California Constitution.
4