People v. Rogers CA6

California Court of Appeal Dec 16, 2014 No. H041221MUnpublished

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. The court held that an order denying a petition for recall of sentence under the Three Strikes Law Reform Act is an appealable order, but ultimately dismissed the defendant's appeal because his brief failed to raise any arguable issues.

Issues

Whether an order denying a petition for recall of sentence under the Three Strikes Law Reform Act is appealable.
Whether the defendant raised any arguable issues on appeal regarding his eligibility for resentencing.

Disposition. dismissed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“a trial court's denial of a section 1170.126 petition to recall is an “order made after judgment, affecting the substantial rights of the party” and is appealable pursuant to section 1237, subdivision (b).”

“Nothing in appellant’s brief raises an arguable issue on appeal. Therefore, we must dismiss the appeal.”

Filed 12/16/14 P. v. Rogers CA6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, H041221 (Santa Cruz County Plaintiff and Respondent, Super. Ct. No. S7-09131)

v. ORDER MODIFYING OPINION ROBERT WAYNE ROGERS, NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT: It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on December 3, 2014, be modified as follows: 1. On page 2, line 3 after the sentence ending with “July 15, 2014” the following sentence is inserted:

This order is appealable. (Teal v. Superior Court (Nov. 6, 2014, S211708) ___ Cal.4th ___ [2014 Cal. LEXIS 10481].)

2. Starting on page 2, line 6, the sentence beginning with “In his brief” and continuing on page 3, to and including the first full paragraph beginning with “Similarly, in enacting” is deleted.

There is no change in the judgment.

Dated: ____________________________________ RUSHING, P.J.

WE CONCUR:

_________________________________ PREMO, J.

_________________________________ ELIA, J.

Filed 12/3/14 P. v. Rogers CA6 (unmodified version) NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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.

People v. Rogers CA6

AI Brief

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SIXTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

ROBERT WAYNE ROGERS,

AI Brief