People v. Stephany CA4/3

Filed 9/29/23 P. v. Stephany CA4/3

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION THREE

THE PEOPLE,

Plaintiff and Respondent, G062228

v. (Super. Ct. No. 14HF2889)

NEIL STORM STEPHANY, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment of the Superior Court of Orange County, Gary S. Paer, Judge. Affirmed. Heather E. Shallenberger, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Defendant Neil Storm Stephany filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to 1 Penal Code section 1172.6. At the prima facie hearing on the petition, the trial court found Stephany ineligible for relief as a matter of law and denied the petition. Appointed appellate counsel for Stephany filed a brief pursuant to People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo) and People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, setting forth the facts of the case. Acknowledging Delgadillo and Wende, appellate counsel has asked this court to conduct an independent review of the record. Stephany was provided 30 days to file written argument on his own behalf but did not do so. Exercising our discretion to independently review the entire record, we find no reasonably arguable issue. (Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.) We therefore affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND In 2015, a jury found Stephany guilty of second degree murder (§ 187, subd. (a)). The trial court imposed a total sentence of 15 years to life. This court affirmed the judgment on direct appeal. (People v. Stephany (Aug. 10, 2017, G053063) [nonpub.opn.].) In September 2022, Stephany filed a petition for resentencing pursuant to section 1172.6. Counsel was appointed at his request. The People filed a response to Stephany’s petition, arguing it should be denied, and Stephany’s counsel filed a brief in support of the petition. The trial court conducted a prima facie hearing on the petition. After reviewing the People’s opposition to the petition, Stephany’s counsel’s brief in support of the petition, as well as the record of conviction, the trial court found Stephany had failed to establish a prima facie showing for relief. A statement of decision was then issued by the trial court. Stephany appealed.