Filed 6/4/14 P. v. Guerra CA2/5 

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS 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 This opinion has not been certified for publication 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 

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT 

DIVISION FIVE 

THE PEOPLE, 

 Plaintiff and Respondent, 

 v. 

PEDRO ORLANDO GUERRA, 

 Defendant and Appellant. 

 B253981 

 (Los Angeles County 

 Super. Ct. No. GA053877) 

 APPEAL from an order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, William C. 

Ryan, Judge. Affirmed. 

 Ronnie Duberstein, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and 

Appellant. 

No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent. 
2

I. INTRODUCTION 

 Defendant, Pedro Orlando Guerra, appeals from a December 19, 2013 order 

denying his motion for recall of sentence pursuant to Penal Code section 1170.126.1 On 

November 1, 2004, a jury convicted defendant of attempted first degree residential 

burglary. (§§ 664, 459.) Defendant had sustained two prior serious felony convictions. 

On March 4, 2005, defendant was sentenced to 35 years to life pursuant to sections 667, 

subdivisions (a)(1) and (e)(2) and 1170.12, subdivision (c)(2). We affirm. 

II. DISCUSSION 

 We appointed counsel to represent defendant on appeal. After examining the 

record, appointed appellate counsel filed an “Opening Brief” in which no issues were 

raised. Instead, appointed appellate counsel requested that this court independently 

review the entire record on appeal pursuant to People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436, 

441. (See Smith v. Robbins (2000) 528 U.S. 259, 277-284.) On March 21, 2014, we 

advised defendant that he had 30 days within which to personally submit any contentions 

or arguments he wishes us to consider. We have examined the entire record and are 

satisfied appointed appellate counsel has fully complied with her responsibilities. 

 The argument defendant raised in the trial court is frivolous. Defendant is 

ineligible for resentencing because he was convicted of attempted first degree burglary, a 

serious felony, and sentenced to an indeterminate term of life imprisonment. (§§ 

1170.126, subd. (e)(1); 1192.7, subds. (c)(18) & (c)(39).) 

 On April 1, 2013, defendant filed a letter with this court. Defendant argues he 

pled guilty to one of his two prior serious felony offenses without ever having been 

advised that he had a right to go to trial. Defendant asserts that had he been so advised, 

he would not have entered a guilty plea. The advisement issue is outside the record on 

 

1 Further statutory references are to the Penal Code unless otherwise noted. 
3

appeal; it cannot be considered on appeal from the trial court’s order denying defendant’s 

resentencing petition. (People v. Waidla (2000) 22 Cal.4th 690, 703, fn. 1 [“An appeal is 

‘limited to the four corners of the [underlying] record on appeal’”]; In re Carpenter 

(1995) 9 Cal.4th 634, 646 [same].) Further, the issue was not raised in conjunction with 

his sentence recall application and is thus forfeited. (People v. Chism (May 5, 2014, 

S101984) ___ Cal.4th ___, ___[2014 WL 1759581*17]; People v. Boyer (2006) 38 

Cal.4th 412, 441, fn. 17.) 

III. DISPOSITION 

 The December 19, 2013 order is affirmed. 

 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS 

 TURNER, P.J. 

 We concur: 

 MOSK, J. 

 KRIEGLER, J.