Court Opinion

ID: 9410549
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-21 18:05:05.107262+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:58.341716
License: Public Domain

Filed 7/21/23 P. v. Hodges 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     NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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,                                                  2d Crim. No. B323794
                                                           (Super. Ct. No. BA203416)
     Plaintiff and Respondent,                               (Los Angeles County)

v.

ODELL D. HODGES,

     Defendant and Appellant.

       Odell D. Hodges appeals the trial court’s order denying his
petition for resentencing pursuant to former Penal Code1 section
1170.95.2
                              FACTS
       Hodges and a friend, who was wearing a blue cap, walked
by three people, including Desmond Alexander, affiliated with
the Bloods street gang. Alexander wanted to know why Hodges’

        All further statutory references are to the Penal Code
         1

unless otherwise indicated.
      2 Former section 1170.95 has been renumbered section

1172.6.
friend was wearing a blue cap in a Bloods neighborhood. A fist
fight broke out. After about five minutes, Hodges and his friend
retreated.
       Shortly thereafter, a van drove by and stopped near
Alexander. The driver got out with a shotgun. Hodges got out
with a handgun. They chased Alexander to the back of a house.
A witness heard gunshots. The men returned to the van and
drove away. Alexander was found dead with a gunshot wound to
his back.
       A jury found Hodges guilty of first degree murder (§ 187,
subd. (a)) and found true that Hodges personally used and
discharged a firearm (§ 12022.53, subd. (c)). The trial court
sentenced Hodges to 45 years to life.
       The trial court denied Hodges’ petition to be resentenced
under section 1170.95 on the ground that the jury was not
instructed on any theory of imputed malice.
                               APPEAL
       We appointed counsel to represent Hodges on appeal.
Counsel filed a brief raising no issues. (People v. Delgadillo
(2022) 14 Cal.5th 216.) On June 12, 2023, we notified Hodges
that his counsel filed a brief raising no issues and that he may
submit a supplementary brief within 30 days. Hodges filed a
timely supplemental brief. In Hodges’ brief he claims the jury
was instructed on imputed malice. The jury was not. The jury
was instructed on direct aiding and abetting: that the defendant
must act with knowledge of the unlawful purpose of the
perpetrator and with the intent of committing, encouraging, or
instigating the crime. (CALJIC No. 3.01.)

                               2
                         DISPOSITION
     The order is affirmed.
          NOT TO BE PUBLISHED.

                                 GILBERT, P. J.

We concur:

             BALTODANO, J.

             CODY, J.

                             3
                  Norman J. Shapiro, Judge

             Superior Court County of Los Angeles

               ______________________________

      Johanna Pirko, under appointment by the Court of Appeal,
for Defendant and Appellant.
      No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.