People v. Lynex CA2/1
Filed 1/31/25 P. v. Lynex CA2/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 ONE
THE PEOPLE, B334323
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. PA034126) v.
TOMMIE LAWSON LYNEX,
Defendant and Appellant.
Appeal from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Daniel B. Feldstern, Judge. Affirmed. A. William Bartz, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Lance E. Winters, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Susan Sullivan Pithey, Assistant Attorney General, Steven D. Matthews and Analee J. Brodie, Deputy Attorneys General for Plaintiff and Respondent.
______________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION Because this appeal raises no substantial issues of law or fact, we issue our decision by memorandum opinion. (See Cal. Stds. Jud. Admin., § 8.1.) In October 2000, a jury convicted appellant Tommie Lawson Lynex of first degree murder. (See People v. Lynex (Mar. 28, 2023, B321620) [nonpub. opn.] (Lynex I).) The trial judge sentenced him to 50 years to life in prison. (Ibid.) Lynex contends, and the Attorney General does not dispute, that the only probation report prepared in connection with the sentencing was a preconviction probation report. In May 2022, Lynex filed a motion pursuant to Penal Code section 1203.01, subdivision (a)1 seeking to correct and
1 Subsequent unspecified statutory references are to the Penal Code. Section 1203.01, subdivision (a) provides, in relevant part: “Immediately after judgment has been pronounced, the judge and the district attorney, respectively, may cause to be filed with the clerk of the court a brief statement of their views respecting the person convicted or sentenced and the crime committed, together with any reports the probation officer may have filed relative to the prisoner. The judge and district attorney shall cause those statements to be filed if no probation officer’s report has been filed. The attorney for the defendant and the law enforcement agency that investigated the case may likewise file with the clerk of the court statements of their views respecting the defendant and the crime of which [the defendant] [was] convicted. Immediately after the filing of those statements and reports, the clerk of the court shall mail a copy thereof, certified by that clerk, with postage prepaid, addressed to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation at the prison or other institution to which the person convicted is delivered.” (§ 1203.01, subd. (a).)
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)