People v. Nowden CA4/1

Filed 9/27/23 P. v. Nowden CA4/1 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, D081660

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. (Super. Ct. No. SCD256605)

TIFFANY LATOYA NOWDEN,

Defendant and Appellant.

APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of San Diego County, Desiree A. Bruce-Lyle, Judge. Affirmed. Tiffany Latoya Nowden, in pro. per.; and Matthew A. Lopas, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. In 2015, Tiffany Latoya Nowden pleaded guilty to second degree

murder (Pen. Code,1 § 187, subd. (a)) and admitted she personally used a deadly weapon in the commission of the offense (§ 12022, subd. (b)(1)).

1 All further statutory references are to the Penal Code.

Nowden also admitted a serious felony prior conviction (§ 667, subd. (a)(1)). The parties stipulated to a term of 20 years to life in prison. Nowden was sentenced in accordance with the plea agreement. In 2022, Nowden filed a form petition for resentencing under former section 1170.95 (now renumbered § 1172.6). Judge Desiree Bruce-Lyle was assigned to hear the petition although she was not the original sentencing judge. The court appointed counsel, received briefing, reviewed the record of conviction, and held a hearing. At the hearing, the court reviewed the change of plea form in which Nowden admitted she personally used the deadly weapon and intentionally killed the victim without deliberation and premeditation. The court found the record established Nowden was the actual killer and was not eligible for relief under section 1172.6 as a matter of law. The court denied the petition without issuing an order to show cause. Nowden filed a timely notice of appeal. 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 potentially meritorious issues for reversal on appeal. Counsel asks the court to exercise its discretion to independently review the record for error as we would do in a case controlled by People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende). We advised Nowden of her right to file her own brief on appeal. She has responded with a brief letter. Her submission does not address any possible issues for reversal of the ruling on the order that is currently before us. She focuses on her original sentence on the serious felony prior and asks the court to vacate the term for the prior. In short,