People v. Reta CA4/3

Filed 5/22/23 P. v. Reta 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G062051 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 16HF0117) v. OPI NION ANGEL MATA RETA,

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Steven D. Bromberg, Judge. Affirmed. Sheila O’Connor, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. * * *

In February 2017, defendant Angel Mata Reta pleaded guilty to attempted 1 murder (Penal Code, §§ 664, subd. (a), 187, subd. (a), count 1). During the same proceeding, he admitted he personally used a deadly weapon (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)), and personally inflicted great bodily injury (§ 12022.7 subd. (a)) (GBI). The court then sentenced Reta to seven years on the attempted murder charge and three years consecutive on the GBI enhancement for an aggregate term of ten years. In July 2022, Reta petitioned the court for resentencing pursuant to former section 1170.95 (later renumbered § 1172.6). That petition was denied in November of 2022. Reta now appeals from the trial court’s denial of his petition. We appointed counsel to represent Reta on appeal. After conducting her analysis of potential appellate issues, appointed counsel informed us in her declaration that she consulted with a staff attorney at Appellate Defenders, Inc. Counsel 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 her client, counsel set forth the facts of the case and asked this court to conduct its own independent review of the appellate record, which we have done. She also directed this court’s attention to the following possible issue: “Whether the trial court erred in denying Reta’s petition for resentencing at the prima facie stage under section 1172.6.” Counsel advised Reta of his right to file a written argument on his own behalf; he has not done so. Although Reta has not filed a supplemental brief, we exercise our discretion to conduct an independent review of the record. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 232.)