Why was Pismo Beach man who killed a friend sentenced to 8 years?

November 18, 2025

Statement from the San Luis Obispo County District Attorney’s Office

We understand the community has questions regarding why the San Luis Obispo County District Attorney agreed to a plea of guilty to involuntary manslaughter and did not pursue the initially charged crime of murder in the death of Jonathan Perez. Here is a more detailed explanation:

Consistent with our ethical duty, a prosecutor can only pursue charges that they believe in good faith can be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, unanimously to a jury, with admissible evidence, and in light of all reasonably foreseeable defenses.

The crime initially charged in the killing of Jonathan was murder. That charge was based on the evidence available at the time of the filing decision and all reasonable inferences that were drawn from that body of evidence. We continued investigating the crime after filing, as we do in nearly every case.

As the investigation proceeded, it became clear that there was significant ambiguity in the evidence regarding the circumstances of the stabbing. We are unable to share all the facts contained in the investigation, however, the uncertainty of what happened prior to the stabbing injury, and specifically how the stabbing occurred, led to our conclusion that both first degree and second degree murder could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

In other words, the totality of the admissible evidence did not meet the legally required burden of proof to continue going forward with the charge of murder.

As a result, after discussing with the victim’s family members, we filed an Amended Complaint alleging involuntary manslaughter. Rodriguez plead guilty to that charge and was sentenced to the maximum possible sentence of four years. The four years was doubled, due to his prior violent conviction under California’s Three Strikes Law, and he was sentenced to a total sentence of eight years in prison.

For the reasons explained at the bottom of this release, we cannot predict with any certainty how long the defendant will remain in prison.

Jonathan’s surviving family were notified in advance of the plea and understood the reasons for it. Several family members spoke at yesterday’s sentencing hearing.

Law of homicide explained

Murder is broken into two degrees; first and second degree. First degree murder occurs when the killing is either committed with premeditation and deliberation, when done using specific methods, or during the commission of specific crimes. The investigation into Jonathan’s death did not reveal evidence of first degree murder.

Second degree murder occurs when an individual either intends to kill (express malice) or when they engage in behavior with a high likelihood of causing death and are personally aware of the likely lethal outcome (implied malice). The initial investigation provided evidence of implied malice, as it involved a fatal stabbing.

Once the investigation was complete it was determined that the uncertainty of the circumstances surrounding the actual killing were such that an implied malice murder could not be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore a guilty plea to involuntary manslaughter was an appropriate resolution.

Law of manslaughter explained

A brief description on the law of manslaughter is helpful.

Manslaughter is broken into three types: voluntary, involuntary and vehicular. Voluntary manslaughter and occurs when the killer commits murder but is provoked and, as a result, acts rashly while under the influence of intense emotion impacting their reasoning or judgment.  (CALCRIM 570 – Vol. Manslaughter: Heat of Passion). In essence, the provocation “mitigates” the murder.

The investigation into Jonathan’s killing did not reveal evidence sufficient for a conviction of voluntary manslaughter.

Involuntary manslaughter is a loaded term and may suggest that the person acted involuntary. That is not the case under the law.

Involuntary manslaughter occurs when a person commits a crime with “criminal negligence” that results in death. Criminal negligence exists where a person acts in a reckless way that creates a high risk of death or great bodily injury, and a reasonable person would know the conduct created such a risk.  (CALCRIM 581 -Involuntary Manslaughter Murder not Charged). The final body of evidence reasonably supported this charge and we were confident it could be proven.

Accordingly, we accepted a guilty plea to this charge.

How much time will the defendant serve in prison?

California law and regulation are continuously changing. Therefore, we cannot predict with any certainty how long the defendant will remain in prison.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) calculates sentence credits based on the California Penal Code, specifically sections relevant to the “three strikes” law and custody credits. The relevant statutory provisions include Penal Code § 667 (three strikes law), § 667.5 (violent felony limitations), § 2933.1 (15% credit for violent felonies), and § 2933 (good conduct/work time credits).

Additionally, CDCR’s regulations (15 CCR § 3043.2 et seq.) and California’s Determinate Sentencing Law guide credit eligibility and calculation. Proposition 57 provided CDCR with expanded authority to award credits for rehabilitation, education, and behavior, but important limits remain—especially for certain violent crimes and strike enhancements. Current CDCR practice and regulations continue to derive authority primarily from the above statutes and court decisions clarifying their implementation.