Court Opinion

ID: 9908476
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-08 20:02:21.929168+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:49:12.484532
License: Public Domain

Filed 12/8/23 P. v. Addison CA4/2

                      NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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

 THE PEOPLE,

          Plaintiff and Respondent,                                      E081811

 v.                                                                      (Super.Ct.No. SWF1300354)

 SCOTT MCINTOSH ADDISON,                                                 OPINION

          Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from the Superior Court of Riverside County. Randall S. Stamen,

Judge. Dismissed.

         Reed Webb, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and

Appellant.

         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

                                                 INTRODUCTION

         Defendant Scott McIntosh Addison appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition

for resentencing under Penal Code section 1170.18. Counsel filed a brief raising no

arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 (Delgadillo).

                                                             1
       On October 3, 2023, we notified defendant that: (1) counsel filed a brief

indicating no arguable issues had been identified; (2) as a case arising from an order

denying postconviction relief, this court was not required to conduct an independent

review of the record, but we could do so in our discretion; and (3) in accordance with the

procedures set forth in Delgadillo, he had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief

raising any argument he wanted this court to consider. We also notified defendant that if

we did not receive a brief within that 30-day period, we may dismiss the appeal as

abandoned. More than 30 days have elapsed, and we have received no communication

from defendant.

       We consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.

(Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)

                                      DISPOSITION

       The appeal is dismissed.

       NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

                                                               FIELDS
                                                                                           J.
We concur:

CODRINGTON
                  Acting P.J.

RAPHAEL
                           J.

                                             2