Court Opinion

ID: 9399935
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-06 19:04:51.697179+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:19:40.968023
License: Public Domain

Filed 6/6/23 P. v. Gualjardo CA3
Opinion following transfer from Supreme Court
                                           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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
                                      THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT
                                                     (Sacramento)
                                                            ----

    THE PEOPLE,                                                                                C093286

                    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                      (Super. Ct. No. 14F00683)

           v.                                                                     OPINION ON TRANSFER

    RUBEN GUAJARDO,

                    Defendant and Appellant.

         Defendant Ruben Guajardo appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for
resentencing under Penal Code section 1172.6.1 Appointed counsel filed an opening
brief that requested this court review the record and determine whether there are any
arguable issues on appeal under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436. After defendant
did not file a supplemental brief, we dismissed his appeal as abandoned in our original
opinion filed March 28, 2022.

1       Effective June 30, 2022, the Legislature renumbered former section 1170.95 to
section 1172.6. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.) There were no substantive changes to the
statute. Defendant filed his petition under former section 1170.95, but we will cite to the
current section 1172.6 throughout this opinion.

                                                             1
       Defendant petitioned our Supreme Court for review; that court has now directed us
to reconsider the matter in light of People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216
(Delgadillo).
       On April 11, 2023, we notified defendant: 1) counsel had filed a brief indicating
no arguable issues had been identified by counsel; 2) as a case arising from an order
denying postconviction relief, defendant was not entitled to counsel or to an independent
review of the record; and 3) in accordance with the procedures set forth in Delgadillo,
defendant had 30 days in which to file a supplemental brief or letter raising any argument
he wanted this court to consider. In addition, we notified defendant if we did not receive
a letter or brief within that 30-day period, the court may dismiss the appeal as abandoned.
More than 30 days have elapsed and we have received no communication from
defendant.
       We again consider defendant’s appeal abandoned and order the appeal dismissed.
(People v. Delgadillo, supra, 14 Cal.5th at p. 232.)

                                      DISPOSITION
       The appeal is dismissed.

                                                 HULL, J.

We concur:

ROBIE, Acting P. J.

KRAUSE, J.

                                             2