People v. Allen CA5

Filed 6/2/23 P. v. Allen CA5

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 FIFTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

THE PEOPLE, F084886 Plaintiff and Respondent, (Kern Super. Ct. No. BF179575A) v.

FALESHA MARSHELLE ALLEN, OPINION Defendant and Appellant.

THE COURT* APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Kern County. Chad A. Louie, Judge. James S. Thomson, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. Office of the Attorney General, Sacramento, California, for Plaintiff and Respondent. -ooOoo-

* Before Hill, P. J., Franson, J. and Snauffer, J.

In 2020, appellant and defendant Falesha Marshelle Allen (appellant) pleaded no contest to count 1, attempted murder, and admitted great bodily injury and firearm enhancements. She was sentenced to an aggregate term of eight years in prison. In 2022, appellant filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to Penal Code section 1172.6.1 The superior court appointed counsel, conducted a hearing, and denied the petition for failing to state a prima facie case. On appeal, appellant’s counsel filed a brief with this court pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo), which summarized the facts and procedural history with citations to the record, raised no issues, and asked this court to independently review the record. On February 23, 2023, this court sent an order to appellant stating her appellate counsel had filed a brief under Wende that indicated no arguable issues had been identified for appeal; previously, when an appellant filed an appeal from the denial of a section 1172.6 petition, and counsel filed a Wende brief, this court performed an independent review of the record to determine whether any error occurred; the California Supreme Court determined in Delgadillo that independent Wende review is not required for appeals from the denial of section 1172.6 petitions; in accordance with the procedures set forth in Delgadillo, appellant had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief or letter raising any arguable issues she wanted this court to consider; and if we did not receive a letter or brief within that 30-day period, this court may dismiss the appeal as abandoned.