People v. Wyly CA4/3

Filed 6/3/25 P. v. Wyly CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G064046

v. (Super. Ct. No. 94SF0520)

STANLEY WYLY, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Andre Manssourian, Judge. Affirmed. Lisa A. Kopelman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Stanley Wyly appeals the summary denial of his petition for 1 resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6. Wyly’s court-appointed counsel filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), setting forth the facts of the case, advising she found no viable issues, and asking this court to conduct an independent review of the record. Wyly was given an opportunity to file a supplemental brief but did not do so. Exercising our discretion under Delgadillo, we have examined the record and find no arguable issues. We therefore affirm. FACTS In 1994, following the death of his infant son, Wyly was charged with murder and several counts of child abuse and inflicting corporal injury on a child. He was the only person charged. A jury convicted Wyly of second degree murder and the remaining charges. The trial court sentenced him to 20 years and four months to life in prison. We affirmed the judgment. (People v. Wyly (July 29, 1997, G018943 [nonpub. opn.].) In 2024, Wyly filed a petition for resentencing under section 1172.6, asserting he could not presently be convicted of murder under sections 188 and 189, which were amended in 2019 to limit the scope of the traditional felony-murder rule and eliminate the natural and probable consequences theory of murder. After appointing counsel and reviewing the parties’ briefs, the information, the abstract of judgment, the jury instructions, and the verdict forms, the trial court found Wyly had not made a prima facie showing he was entitled to relief and denied his petition. The court reasoned: “A review of the