People v. Tajdidi CA4/3

Filed 1/9/24 P. v. Tajdidi 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NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or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 This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.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, G062288

v. (Super. Ct. No. 18CF1143)

POURIYA TAJDIDI, OPINION

Defendant and Appellant.

Appeal from a postjudgment order of the Superior Court of Orange County, Patrick H. Donahue, Judge. Affirmed. Robert V. Vallandigham, Jr., under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant. No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

We appointed counsel to represent Pouriya Tajdidi on appeal. Counsel filed a brief that set forth the facts of the case. Counsel did not argue against his client but advised the court he found no issues to argue on his behalf. Counsel advised the court that the procedures set forth in People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738 (Anders), do not apply to this case. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 226, 231 (Delgadillo).) Therefore, when appointed appellate counsel finds no viable issues, counsel should file a brief informing the court that counsel found no arguable issues and including a concise narration of facts. (Ibid.) The reviewing court should send the brief to the defendant with notice the defendant may file a supplemental brief or letter within 30 days, and if the defendant does not, the court may dismiss the appeal. (Id. at pp. 231-232.) However, no independent review of the record is compelled. (Id. at p. 232.) If no brief or letter is filed, the court may dismiss the appeal without issuing an opinion but should notify the defendant of the dismissal. (Ibid.) The court retains discretion to independently review 1 the record in any Penal Code section 1172.6 appeal. (Ibid.) Counsel requested this court exercise its discretion to conduct an independent review, which we have. Counsel provided information about issues he considered to assist the court in conducting a discretionary independent review of the record. (Anders, supra, 386 U.S. at pp. 744-745.) Counsel identified one issue—does section 1172.6 apply in a case where the person seeking resentencing has not been convicted of murder or manslaughter but pleaded guilty to assault with a deadly weapon following dismissal of a charge of attempted murder?