People v. Leon CA4/3

Filed 9/2/20 P. v. Leon 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G058881 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 15CF0763) v. OPINION ADAN RODRIGUEZ LEON,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Cheri T. Pham, Judge. Affirmed. Richard L. Fitzer, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

In 2017 Adan Rodriguez Leon was convicted of first degree murder, a 1 violation of Penal Code section 187, subdivision (a). The jury also found as alleged, that Leon had personally used a firearm when he committed the murder pursuant to section 12022.53, subdivision (d). The trial court thereafter sentenced Leon to 50-years-to-life in prison. Leon appealed. We affirmed the conviction in 2019. (People v. Leon (July 10, 2019, G054854) [nonpub. opn.].) We reversed the sentence, however, and remanded the case to the trial court with directions that it exercise its discretion with respect to striking or dismissing the firearm enhancement since the Legislature provided trial courts with such discretion in 2018, before Leon’s case was final. After the remand, Leon’s trial counsel filed a new sentencing brief in which he urged the trial court to dismiss the firearm enhancement. The People responded with opposition to the motion. The court conducted a hearing on the issue in February 2020. At the conclusion of that hearing, the trial judge declined to strike or dismiss the enhancement. Leon filed a notice of appeal from that judgment. That is the appeal currently before us. We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. After conducting his analysis of potential appellate issues, appointed counsel informed us in a declaration that a staff attorney at Appellate Defenders, Inc. had also reviewed the record. Counsel then filed a brief pursuant to the procedures set forth in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. While not arguing against Leon, counsel set forth the facts of the case and advised us he was unable to find an issue to argue on his client’s behalf. Leon was given the opportunity to file written argument on his own behalf; he has not done so.