Filed 11/22/22 P. v. Miner CA2/8

Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 EIGHT

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

GREGORY DOUGLAS MINER,

Defendant and Appellant.

 B301803

 Los Angeles County

 Super. Ct. No. LA044952

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of 

Los Angeles County, Alan Schneider, Judge. Reversed.

Jonathan E. Demson, under appointment by the Court of 

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

Xavier Becerra and Rob Bonta, Attorneys General, Lance 

E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan 

Pithey, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Charles S. Lee and 

Nicholas J. Webster, Deputy Attorneys General, for Plaintiff and 

Respondent.

____________________
2

Gregory Douglas Miner appeals the trial court’s denial of 

his request for resentencing under former Penal Code section 

1170.95. (Effective June 30, 2022, section 1170.95 was 

renumbered section 1172.6, with no change in text (Stats. 2022, 

ch. 58, § 10).)

On March 30, 2021, we held that Miner’s special 

circumstance findings made him ineligible for resentencing and 

we affirmed the trial court’s ruling. On October 19, 2022, the 

Supreme Court directed us to vacate that decision and reconsider 

in light of People v. Strong (2022) 13 Cal.5th 698 (Strong). Miner 

and the prosecution now agree we should reverse the trial court. 

We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Statutory citations are to the Penal Code. 

In 2007, a jury convicted Miner of two counts of first degree 

robbery (§ 211), one count of first degree burglary (§ 459), and 

two counts of first degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)). The jury 

found true special circumstances that each murder occurred 

during a robbery and burglary. (§ 190.2, subd. (a)(17).) It also 

found Miner personally used a knife in the murders, robberies, 

and burglary. (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1).) 

On February 19, 2019, Miner filed a petition for 

resentencing under former section 1170.95. The court denied the 

petition. It found Miner failed to make a prima facie case 

because of the jury’s special circumstance and knife findings, and 

because the murder victims were stabbed and their house was set 

on fire. The court reasoned that Miner was the actual killer or a 

major participant who acted with reckless indifference to human 

life.

We agree with Miner and the prosecution that we must 

reverse because of Strong. In Strong, the California Supreme 
3

Court held that felony-murder special circumstance findings that 

predate People v. Banks (2015) 61 Cal.4th 788 and People v. 

Clark (2016) 63 Cal.4th 522 do not preclude relief under section 

1172.6 at the prima facie stage. (Strong, supra, 13 Cal.5th at pp. 

717–718.) Furthermore, courts cannot independently examine 

the record at the prima facie stage to evaluate whether there is 

sufficient evidence to sustain special circumstance findings under 

Banks and Clark. (Id. at pp. 718–720.) 

We remand for the trial court to issue an order to show 

cause under section 1172.6, subdivision (c) and to follow the 

procedures of section 1172.6, subdivision (d). 

DISPOSITION

We reverse the order denying Miner’s resentencing petition 

and remand for further proceedings under Penal Code section 

1172.6, subdivisions (c) and (d). 

WILEY, J.

We concur: 

STRATTON, P. J. 

GRIMES, J.