Filed 3/4/24 P. v. Coulter CA2/6

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

THE PEOPLE,

 Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

JACK HENRY COULTER,

 Defendant and Appellant.

2d Crim. No. B332417

(Super. Ct. No. 2006040297)

(Ventura County)

Jack Henry Coulter appeals the order of the trial 

court denying his petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal 

Code section 1172.6.

1 We appointed counsel to represent 

appellant on appeal. After an examination of the record, counsel 

filed an opening brief raising no issues and requesting that we 

follow the procedures set forth in People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 

Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo). Appellant filed his own supplemental 

brief, in propria persona. We affirm.

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.
2

Procedural Background

In 2007, appellant was convicted by guilty plea of the 

first degree murder of Jose Pirir (§ 187, subd. (a)), two counts of 

attempted second degree robbery (§§ 644/211), and two counts of 

assault with a firearm. (§ 245, subd. (a)(2).) At his plea hearing, 

appellant admitted that he, “committed the crime of murder in 

violation of . . . section 187, a felony, and that you did willfully 

and unlawfully with malice aforethought murder Juan Pirir . . . .” 

He further admitted that, “during the commission of this first 

degree murder [he] personally and intentionally discharged a 

firearm, specifically a handgun, within the meaning of . . . section 

12022.53(d).” Appellant also admitted that he committed the 

attempted robberies and the assaults, and that he personally 

used a firearm in committing each offense. Appellant agreed that 

the police reports and probation report provided the factual basis 

for his plea. He was sentenced to the agreed-upon term of 50 

years to life. 

Appellant challenged his guilty plea, contending the 

trial court erred when it accepted the police reports and 

probation report as the factual basis for the plea because the 

probation report had not been prepared at the time of his plea. 

We affirmed, holding that, “in accepting a guilty plea, a trial 

court, with the express or implied consent of the defendant, may 

put the issue of a factual basis for the plea over to the sentencing 

hearing.” (People v. Coulter (2008) 163 Cal.App.4th 1117, 1119.) 

In summarizing the procedural history of appellant’s case, we 

noted, “The probation report states that appellant was arrested 

after he shot and killed Juan Pirir during an attempted robbery.” 

(Id. at p. 1120.)
3

In December 2022, appellant filed a section 1172.6 

form petition for resentencing. After appointing counsel to 

represent appellant and considering briefs submitted by both the 

prosecution and the defense, the trial court denied the petition. 

It found appellant “is ineligible for relief as a matter of law as the 

actual killer based upon findings of conviction.” The trial court’s 

written minute order explained, “Due to the absence of 

information in the record of conviction establishing someone else 

as the actual killer, combined with [appellant’s] admission to 

personally and intentionally discharging a firearm that caused 

death to the murder victim, and the appellate opinion indicating 

the basis of [appellant’s] conviction was as the actual killer, the 

petition for recall and resentencing pursuant to . . . section 1172.6 

is respectfully denied.” 

Discussion

Where, as here, appointed counsel finds no arguable 

issues in an appeal that is not from the first appeal after 

conviction, appellant is not entitled to our independent review of 

the record pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, or 

its federal counterpart, Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. 

(Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 226.) However, he is entitled 

to appellate consideration of any contentions raised in his 

supplemental brief. (Id. at p. 232.)

Appellant’s supplemental brief contains no formal 

legal argument. He states that he believes he was 

“oversentenced [sic] and the first counsel I was appointed back in 

2006 did not represent me properly, and convinced me to take a 
4

deal which really was no deal at all.” Neither point provides a 

basis for resentencing under section 1172.6.2 

To be eligible for resentencing, appellant must

establish that he pled guilty in lieu of a trial at which he could 

have been convicted of murder on a now-invalid theory. 

(§ 1172.6, subd. (a)(2).) But appellant was charged with murder 

as the actual killer, not on any theory of imputed malice. At his 

plea hearing, appellant, who was the only person charged with 

these offenses, expressly admitted that he committed murder by 

personally and intentionally discharging a firearm. Because he 

was the actual killer, appellant is ineligible for resentencing 

under section 1172.6. (People v. Lewis (2021) 11 Cal.5th 952, 971; 

People v. Fisher (2023) 95 Cal.App.5th 1022, 1029-1030 [petition 

properly denied at prima facie stage where petitioner expressly 

admitted at plea hearing to personally shooting and killing two 

people].)

Disposition

The order denying appellant’s petition for 

resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6 is affirmed.

2 We note that the amended felony complaint filed against 

appellant alleged the special circumstance that he committed the 

murder while engaged in the commission and attempted 

commission of a robbery. Had this allegation been proven true at 

trial, appellant would have been eligible for a sentence of death 

or life in prison without the possibility of parole. (§ 190.2, subd. 

(a)(17)(A).) His guilty plea avoided both.
5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

YEGAN, J.

We concur:

GILBERT, P. J.

BALTODANO, J.
Derek D. Malan, Judge

Superior Court County of Ventura

______________________________

Alex Coolman, under appointment by the Court of 

Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.

No appearance by Respondent.