Filed 8/18/26 P. v. Jones 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, B348558
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County
Super. Ct. No. XCNBA221615)
v.
RUBEN JAMES JONES,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of
Los Angeles County, Craig Richman, Judge. Reversed and
remanded.
Robert Derham, under appointment by the Court of Appeal,
for Defendant and Appellant.
Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Charles C. Ragland, Chief
Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant
Attorney General, Scott A. Taryle and Chung L. Mar, Deputy
Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and Respondent.
‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗‗
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
Defendant and appellant Ruben Jones appeals from an
order denying his second petition for resentencing under Penal
Code section 1172.6.2 The trial court denied the petition on the
ground that it had previously been filed and denied. Jones
argues, and the People concede, that this was error. We agree
and reverse the trial court order.
BACKGROUND
In 2002, a jury found Jones guilty of second degree murder
and three counts of attempted murder committed willfully,
deliberately, and with premeditation. The jury also found true
allegations that a principal personally and intentionally used and
discharged a firearm, and that the offenses were committed for
the benefit of a criminal street gang. The court sentenced Jones
to life plus 60 years to life. The judgment was affirmed on
appeal. (People v. Jones (May 8, 2024, B326085) [nonpub. opn.]
(Jones); People v. DeVault (Mar. 11, 2005, B162631) [nonpub.
opn.].)
In 2021, Jones filed a petition under section 1172.6. He
sought resentencing of his second degree murder conviction.
Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the
petition. Jones appealed. This court affirmed the trial court
1 We resolve this matter by memorandum opinion, consistent
with California Standards of Judicial Administration, section 8.1.
(People v. Garcia (2002) 97 Cal.App.4th 847, 850–855.)
2 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2
order. We noted in the opinion: “Although Jones’s petition sought
resentencing of only his second degree murder conviction, on
appeal he appears to include the attempted murder convictions in
his arguments. We decline to consider the application of
section 1172.6 to Jones’s attempted murder convictions since he
has not sought resentencing in the trial court in the first
instance.” (Jones, supra, B326085, fn. 3.)
In November 2024, Jones filed a “Memorandum of Points
and Authorities in Support of Senate Bill No. 775 Petition.”
Jones sought resentencing of his attempted murder convictions,
arguing he was prosecuted on a natural and probable
consequences theory and on a theory that allowed the jury to
impute malice to him.
The trial court summarily denied the petition, explaining:
“Defendant’s motion pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.6 is
denied as the Court finds Defendant’s Petition for Resentencing
pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.6 was previously filed on
September 24, 2021 and denied on October 27, 2022.”
Jones timely appealed.
DISCUSSION
On January 1, 2019, Senate Bill No. 1437 (2017–2018 Reg.
Sess.) (Senate Bill No. 1437) eliminated the natural and probable
consequences doctrine as a basis for murder and limited the scope
of the felony murder rule. (Stats. 2018, ch. 1015, § 1, subd. (f).)
Senate Bill No. 1437 also created the resentencing procedure at
issue here. Jones filed his first section 1172.6 petition seeking
resentencing of his conviction for second degree murder pursuant
to the changes to the law effectuated by Senate Bill No. 1437.
On January 1, 2022, while Jones’s first petition was
pending, Senate Bill No. 775 (2021–2022 Reg. Sess.) (Senate Bill
3
No. 775) further amended the Penal Code to eliminate the
natural and probable consequences doctrine as a theory of
liability for attempted murder. (§ 1172.6, subd. (a).)
Jones’s first petition sought resentencing of the murder
conviction only. This court expressly did not consider the
attempted murder convictions as they had not been presented for
resentencing in the trial court. The denial of the first petition did
not prevent Jones from subsequently seeking resentencing of the
attempted murder convictions once that relief became available
due to changes in the law. The second petition was not the same
as the first. (People v. Farfan (2021) 71 Cal.App.5th 942, 949–
951.)
We therefore reverse the trial court order denying Jones’s
second petition for resentencing. On remand, the trial court must
appoint counsel for Jones (§ 1172.6, subd. (b)(3)) and conduct
further proceedings under section 1172.6 as to Jones’s attempted
murder convictions.
4
DISPOSITION
The trial court order is reversed. The matter is remanded
for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL
REPORTS
ADAMS, Acting P. J.
We concur:
HANASONO, J.
OCHOA, J.*
* Judge of the Los Angeles Superior Court, assigned by the
Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California
Constitution.
5