Court Opinion

ID: 9412789
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-01 17:06:09.904216+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:41:33.027261
License: Public Domain

Filed 8/1/23 P. v. Arias CA3
                                           NOT TO BE PUBLISHED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 This opinion has not been certified for publication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,                                                                                   C097617

                    Plaintiff and Respondent,                                      (Super. Ct. No. 95F07856)

           v.

 CARLOS FRANK ARIAS,

                    Defendant and Appellant.

         Defendant Carlos Frank Arias appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for
resentencing under former Penal Code section 1172.6.1 Counsel filed a brief raising no
arguable issues under People v. Delgadillo (2022) 14 Cal.5th 216 and requesting we
exercise our discretion to review the entire record for arguable issues on appeal.

1 Defendant filed this petition under former Penal Code section 1170.95. The
Legislature amended Penal Code section 1170.95 effective January 1, 2022, under Senate
Bill No. 775 (2021-2022 Reg. Sess.) (Stats. 2021, ch. 551). Effective June 30, 2022, the
Legislature renumbered Penal Code section 1170.95 to section 1172.6 without
substantive change. (Stats. 2022, ch. 58, § 10.)

                                                             1
       On May 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 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.

                                                      /s/
                                                  HORST, J.

We concur:

    /s/
EARL, P. J.

   /s/
DUARTE, J.

 Judge of the Placer County Superior Court, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to
article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

                                              2