People v. Nolasco CA3

Filed 6/16/23 P. v. Nolasco CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published,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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, C097586

Plaintiff and Respondent, (Super. Ct. No. 98F00851)

v.

ESTALIN NOLASCO,

Defendant and Appellant.

Defendant Estalin Nolasco appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for resentencing under Penal Code1 section 1172.6.2 Appointed counsel filed a brief raising no arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 or People v. Wende

1 Undesignated statutory references are to the Penal Code. 2 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. Defendant filed his petition under former section 1170.95, but we will cite to the current section 1172.6 throughout this opinion.

1

(1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 and requesting we exercise our discretion to review the entire record for arguable issues on appeal. DISCUSSION On April 14, 2023, we notified defendant: (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 People v. 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.)

*****