Filed 12/14/22 P. v. Wallquist CA2/3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THREE THE PEOPLE, B312263 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. A035045) v. CARL G. WALLQUIST, Defendant and Appellant. APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Chet L. Taylor, Judge. Affirmed. Robert Booher, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Charles S. Lee and Theresa A. Patterson, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent. _________________________ Decades ago, Carl Wallquist pleaded guilty to murder and robbery. Thereafter, he filed a petition for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.6.2 After an evidentiary hearing under that section, the trial court denied the petition, finding that Wallquist, who was not the actual killer, was a major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human life. Wallquist now appeals, contending that the trial court employed the wrong standard of review, the evidence was insufficient to show he acted with reckless indifference to human life, and his right to be present at the evidentiary hearing was denied. We reject these contentions and affirm the order. BACKGROUND In 1987, Wallquist pleaded guilty to one count of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)), three counts of residential robbery (§ 213.5), and one count of first degree burglary (§ 459). The trial court sentenced him to 25 years to life for the murder plus one year for an arming enhancement (§ 12022, subd. (a)). Decades later, our Legislature passed Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill 1437). In 2019, Wallquist petitioned for resentencing under the new law. The trial court appointed counsel for Wallquist, issued an order to show cause, and set the matter for an evidentiary hearing. At the evidentiary hearing, the trial court considered the transcript from the 1986 preliminary hearing. At the 1 All further undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 Effective June 30, 2022, section 1170.95 was renumbered to section 1172.6, with no change in text. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) 2 preliminary hearing, Elodia Torres3 testified that on October 18, 1986, she was living in an apartment with her three children. Also present that morning at the apartment were Guadalupe Rubio, Pedro Torres (Elodia’s brother), Alma Mendoza (Pedro’s wife), and Jose Gutierrez. While in the bedroom with Gutierrez, Elodia heard the front door being kicked in. Wallquist, armed with a shotgun, and his accomplice Michael Odell, armed with a pistol, were in the apartment. At gunpoint, Wallquist ordered Elodia, who was holding her child, out of the …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals