People v. Garces CA4/1

Filed 2/17/26 P. v. Garces CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D085853

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD133238)

LUIS MANUEL GARCES,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Francis M. Devaney, Judge. Affirmed. Luis Manuel Garces, in pro. per.; and William J. Capriola, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. In 2004, a jury convicted Luis Manuel Garces of first-degree murder

(Pen. Code,1 § 187, subd. (a)), the jury found Garces personally used a knife in the offense (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)). The jury also convicted Garces of

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

assault with a deadly weapon and found he personally inflicted great bodily injury (§§ 245, subd. (a)(1), 12022.7, subd. (a)). Garces was sentenced to prison for an indeterminate term of 28 years to life. In 2007, this court affirmed the convictions in an unpublished opinion (People v. Garces (Dec. 17, 2007, D045022) but modified the sentence to 32 years to life. In 2023, Garces filed a pro. per. petition for resentencing under section 1172.6. The court appointed counsel, received briefing, and reviewed the record of conviction including the jury instructions and the jury’s verdicts. The court found Garces was not tried under any of the theories of liability that would qualify for relief under section 1172.6. The court denied the petition. Garces filed a timely notice of appeal. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 indicating counsel has not been able to identify any arguable issue for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to exercise its discretion to independently review the record for error as we would if the case was controlled by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. We offered Garces the opportunity to file his own brief on appeal. Garces has responded with a supplemental brief. In his supplemental brief, Garces claims he is innocent of all charges and did not commit any criminal acts. He claims the court and counsel at trial fabricated the evidence against him and that some witnesses testified falsely. Garces does not address the validity of the court’s denial of the petition for resentencing based on the record of conviction. He simply does