Court Opinion

ID: 9894650
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-11-02 17:04:03.792137+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:10:40.154609
License: Public Domain

Filed 11/2/23 P. v. Castaneda CA4/2
See dissenting opinion.

                      NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                      E081333

 v.                                                                      (Super.Ct.No. FVI22001753)

 CARLOS ENRIQUE CASTANEDA,                                               OPINION

          Defendant and Appellant.

         APPEAL from the Superior Court of San Bernardino County. Charlie Hill, Jr.,

Judge. Appeal dismissed.

         Belinda Escobosa, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and

Appellant.

         No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.

                                                             1
       Carlos Enrique Castaneda appeals from an order revoking his probation and

imposing a previously suspended sentence of four years in state prison. Castaneda’s

appointed appellate counsel filed a brief raising no issues and asking that we

independently review the record under People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 (Wende)

and Anders v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 738. We gave Castaneda the opportunity to file

a personal supplemental brief, and he did not file a supplemental brief. Wende review is

not required in an appeal from a postjudgment order in criminal proceedings (People v.

Freeman (2021) 61 Cal.App.5th 126, 132-133), and we decline to exercise our discretion

to conduct an independent review of the entire record. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14

Cal.5th 216, 232.) We therefore dismiss the appeal as abandoned. (People v. Serrano

(2012) 211 Cal.App.4th 496, 504.)

                                      DISPOSITION

       The appeal is dismissed.

       NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

                                                               MENETREZ
                                                                                           J.

I concur:

CODRINGTON
                          J.

                                             2
[People v. Castaneda, E081333]

RAMIREZ, P.J.

       I respectfully dissent. Our Supreme Court has afforded reviewing courts

discretion with respect to the disposition of postconviction appeals in which appointed

appellate counsel has filed a no-issues brief and defendant did not file a supplemental

brief. (People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216, 232.) I would exercise that discretion

to conduct an independent review of the record.

                                                               RAMIREZ
                                                                                          P. J.

                                             1