People v. Cuevas CA4/1

Filed 8/2/23 P. v. Cuevas CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

COURT OF APPEAL, FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

THE PEOPLE, D081672

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. CR20219)

JOHN CHARLES CUEVAS,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Robert O. Amador, Judge. Affirmed. John Charles Cuevas, in pro. per.; and John L. Staley, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. In 1970, John Charles Cuevas pleaded guilty to first degree murder

(Pen. Code,1 § 187). In 2022, Cuevas filed a petition for resentencing under section 1172.6. The court appointed counsel, received briefing, and held a hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court found that Cuevas was

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

the actual killer of the victim, who he strangled to death. Because Cuevas was the killer who acted alone in the relief under section 1172.6, the court denied the petition without issuing an order to show cause. Cuevas timely appealed from the denial of his petition. Appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) indicating counsel has not been able to identify any meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to exercise our discretion to independently review the record for error as we would if People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende) applied. We notified Cuevas of his right to file his own brief on appeal. He has responded with two submissions totaling almost 100 pages of argument and exhibits. As we will discuss later, the material submitted does not address the merits of the petition for resentencing under section 1172.6. Notwithstanding the length of the supplemental briefing, it does not identify any potentially meritorious issues for reversal of the order in this case. STATEMENT OF FACTS Cuevas admitted that on January 21, 1970, he strangled Debra F. to death. DISCUSSION As we have noted, appellate counsel has filed a brief pursuant to the procedure established by Delgadillo and asks the court to independently review the record for error. To assist the court in its review, and in compliance with Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), counsel has identified a possible issue which was considered in evaluating the potential merits of this appeal: Whether the trial court erred in finding Cuevas had not stated a prima facie case for relief.