People v. Quinonez CA3

Filed 6/13/23 P. v. Quinonez CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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 THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento) ----

THE PEOPLE, C097380

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 16FE004174)

v.

JOSE QUINONEZ,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Jose Quinonez appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for resentencing under Penal Code former section 1170.95.1 Counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 or People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and requesting that we exercise our discretion to review the entire record for arguable issues on appeal.

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to section 1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) There were no substantive changes to the statute.

1

On February 14, 2023, we notified defendant that (1) counsel had filed a brief indicating no arguable issues had been identified by counsel; (2) as a case arising from an order denying postconviction relief, defendant was not entitled to counsel or to an independent review of the record; and (3) in accordance with the procedures set forth in Delgadillo, defendant had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief or letter raising any argument he wanted this court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant if we did not receive a letter or brief within that 30-day period, the court may dismiss the appeal as abandoned. More than 30 days have elapsed and we have received no communication from defendant. We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed. (People v. Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.) DISPOSITION The appeal is dismissed.

KRAUSE , J.

We concur: