People v. Murillo
Annotate this Case
The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's denial of defendant's petition under Penal Code section 1170.95 for resentencing on his murder conviction. A jury convicted defendant of murder on the basis of his participation in a burglary in which a cohort shot and killed a victim, and found true a felony-murder special circumstance.
The court held that the proper procedure for collaterally challenging a special circumstance finding is a petition for habeas corpus, not a petition under section 1170.95. The court also held that the record of conviction shows as a matter of law that the special circumstance finding is valid even under People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788, and People v. Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522, which clarified the meaning of "major participant" and "reckless indifference to human life." In this case, the record of conviction establishes as a matter of law that defendant was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life when he instructed a cohort to fire the gun at the victim. Furthermore, other factors support the conclusion that defendant was a major participant in the burglary and that he acted with reckless indifference to human life.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.