People v. Comminey CA4/3

Filed 7/1/25 P. v. Comminey 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G064437

v. (Super. Ct. No. FVA023273-1)

WALTER CHARLES COMMINEY, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of San Bernardino County, Gregory S. Tavill, Judge. Affirmed. Lisa A. Kopelman, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance by Plaintiff and Respondent.

In People v. Franklin (2016) 63 Cal.4th 261 (Franklin), the California Supreme Court ruled youthful offenders are entitled to establish a record of youth-related mitigating factors that may be relevant at their future 1 parole hearing. Defendant Walter Charles Comminey appeals from a postjudgment order that was issued in conjunction with his Franklin proceeding. His appointed attorney filed a brief under the procedures described in People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, declaring she was unable to find any issues to raise on Comminey’s behalf. Having reviewed the record ourselves, we also detect no arguable issues. We therefore affirm. PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2007, Comminey was sentenced to 75 years to life in prison after a jury convicted him of first degree murder with multiple firearm enhancements. If Comminey had been over the age of 25 when he committed the murder, he would not be eligible for parole until he had served 75 years in prison. But because he was only 18 years old at that time, he will be eligible for a youth offender parole hearing during the 25th year of his incarceration. (Pen. Code, § 3051, subd. (b)(3).) In 2023, Comminey filed a letter request for a Franklin proceeding in the trial court. The court appointed him an attorney and set the proceeding for April 11, 2024. In anticipation of the proceeding, defense counsel had Comminey undergo an extensive psychological examination. The results of that examination are contained in a detailed report that defense counsel submitted to the court shortly before the Franklin proceeding.